The Teleological Argument

The idea that there is evidence of design in the universe which suggests a designer

The classical argument

• • • • The universe has order, purpose and regularity The complexity of the universe shows evidence of design Such design implies a designer The designer of the universe is God

Two arguments for design

• • Design Qua (relating to) Regularity – The universe works to a particular order – Planets rotate – There are natural laws Design Qua Purpose – Parts of the universe appear to fit for a purpose

Design Qua Regularity

• • Thomas Aquinas’ The fifth way Non-intelligent things produce order – They require an intelligent being to do this • “Now whatever lacks knowledge cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence;” • Thomas Aquinas,

Summa Theologica

Design Qua Purpose

• • • Response to 17 th century mechanistic physics Isaac Newton (1642-1727) – laws of gravity and motion • Universe is like a machine with all the parts fitting and working together like clockwork Pierre Laplace (1749 – 1827) – no need for God • One day we will know everything through science

Design Qua Purpose

• William Paley (1743-1805) – Responded to the new scientific ideas – Book –

Natural Theology (1802)

• Compared a ‘stone’ with a ‘watch’ • Would find that the parts of a watch had been put together for a purpose • • • An intelligent person would infer a designer Similarly the parts of the universe infer a designer Similarly the parts of the body infer a designer

William Paley

• • The first part of Paley’s argumnet is Design Qua Purpose The second part of his argument is Design Qua Regularity • Using Newton’s discoveries, he points out that the rotation of the planets could not have come about by chance • He concludes design by an external agent - God

David Hume (1711-1776)

• • • •

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779)

Why Conclude a beginning?

Why conclude the creator to be the God of theism?

– Why not one or more lesser gods?

Flaws in design – suffering, death – support the idea of an imperfect designer

David Hume

(1711-1776) • Hume’s arguments against design: – Humans have limited knowledge and experience – Analogy of human design suggests many gods not one – Analogy of universe to machine not good • More like a vegetable that grows – Epicurean Hypothesis points to chance

Epicurean Hypothesis

• • • • At time of creation universe consisted of random particles Universe is eternal Inevitable that eventually an ordered state would develop Therefore the stability and order is the result of random movement of particles not a designer

John Stuart Mill

(1806-1873) • An empiricist • knowledge grounded in experience – God is described as – All-powerful – All-knowing – All-loving – There is suffering in the world – An all-loving God would not allow suffering – Therefore either God • could not avoid suffering, did not know about it or does not care

Charles Darwin (1809 -1882)

• •

The Origins of Species (1859)

Random variations within species result in – Survival of those with best advantage (the fittest) – Demise of those disadvantaged • Therefore a process of natural selection rather than design by God

Putting it altogether

• Write bullet points that show how you would go about answering the following exam question: a) b) Explain the main arguments for design as presented by Aquinas and Paley (33) ‘Hume makes a more convincing case than Paley.’ Discuss (17)