teleological

Proving God Exists...AgainThe Teleological Argument

An argument from Design

look at the ipodcan you work out what it is for?look at it....

what about if you you were from the past?


look at the flarecan you work out what it is for?look at it....

what about if you didn’t know what it was?


look at the Alethiometercan you work out what it is for?look at it....

what about if you didn’t know what it was?


where would you think all these things came from?


where would you think all these things came from?why not just battered together over time?like a rock shaped like something?

Telos, teloiGreek againliterally ‘end’ (or point of)When things are pretty complicated you can usually tell what they are for (why they’ve been designed that way...)

either...

it’s because it is just so ordered and intricate...or it’s because it ‘does stuff’...

Is it Intricate?

Discuss

Is it Intricate?

oxygen/CO2 cyclethere’s loads of theminside/outside our bodies

Is it Intricate?

Physiology of various (all?) living systems

Is it Intricate?ecosystemsone thing dies, sometimes whole food webs can die out...

Is it Intricate?

and that’s just earth... think bigger

surely this is a little more impressive than any watch?

Our Worlddoes it have an ‘end’?

a telos?a purpose?picture pairs

so there you go... by analogy...1 The World around us resembles the

artefacts of human creation, in that they display COMPLEXITY2 The complexity of human artefacts comes from having been designed by an INTELLIGENT DESIGNER3 We have no reason to assume that what holds for human artefacts should not hold for the world around us4 Therefore, the complexity in the world, comes from having been designed and created by an intelligent being

so there you go... by analogy...

SO...what would you say...Deductive/Inductive?a priori/posteriori?

design in the world?

not a new ideaancient greeksAquinaseven taught in some schools in US as alternative to evolution

who made this?

how do you know?

David Hume

on analogy

look in your support books

Look round the world: contemplate the whole and every part of it: you will find it to be nothing but one great machine, subdivided into an infinite number of lesser machines, which again admit of subdivisions to a degree beyond what human senses and faculties can trace and explain. All these various machines, and even their most minute parts, are adjusted to each other with an accuracy which ravishes into admiration all men who have ever contemplated them. The curious adapting of means to ends, throughout all nature, resembles exactly, though it much exceeds, the productions of human contrivance; of human designs, thought, wisdom, and intelligence. Since, therefore, the effects resemble each other, we are led to infer, by all the rules of analogy, that the causes also resemble; and that the Author of Nature is somewhat similar to the mind of man, though possessed of much larger faculties, proportioned to the grandeur of the work which he has executed. By this argument a posteriori, and by this argument alone, do we prove at once the existence of a Deity, and his similarity to human mind and intelligence. (Hume, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion)

Objection - claim 3grounds for analogy are too weak

the world is pretty different to all the designed things we see aroundthere are similarities, but not enoughthere is complexity, but it’s differentworld is more organic, appears that it has ‘grown’

ObjectionIf we make an analogy with with a vegetable...and that analogy is just as good, or even better...then we are drawing analogy between the world and not designed things

this argument begins to look less convincing

Tasktry to think of an analogy that supports the design argumentthink of one that you think does not

explain the differences, and which you find more convincing as an analogy

work in your tables, get the best of each

Task - for example...

analogy that supports the design argument

one that you think does not

reasons why best analogy

reasons why best analogy

Tasktry to think of an analogy that supports the design argumentthink of one that you think does not

explain the differences, and which you find more convincing as an analogy

work in your tables, get the best of each

Now think

carefully...

Idea is that you can tell something about Humans

by human creations...

What do you reckon you could work out about the ‘Designer’ of our world?

Objection 2: The Designer(s)

“A great number of men join in building a house or a ship, in rearing a city, in framing a commonwealth; why may not several deities combine in contriving and framing a world?”

Hume

2 Big ProblemsArgument from analogy

Analogyanalogy |əˈnaləjē|noun ( pl. -gies)

a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification : an analogy between the workings of nature and those of human societies | he interprets logical functions by analogy with machines.

• a correspondence or partial similarity : the syndrome is called deep dysgraphia because of its analogy to deep dyslexia.See note at likeness .

• a thing that is comparable to something else in significant respects : works of art were seen as an analogy for works of nature.

meet William Paley

Cambridge Moral Philosopher

1743 - 1805

the watch analogy

In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against a stone, and were asked how the stone came to be there; I might possibly answer, that, for anything I knew to the contrary, it had lain there forever: nor would it perhaps be very easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a watch upon the ground, and it

should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place; I should hardly think of the answer I had before given, that for anything I knew, the watch might have

always been there. (...) There must have existed, at some time, and at some place or other, an artificer or artificers, who formed [the watch] for the purpose which we find it actually to answer; who comprehended its construction,

and designed its use. (...) Every indication of contrivance, every manifestation of design, which existed in the

watch, exists in the works of nature; with the difference, on the side of nature, of being greater or more, and that

in a degree which exceeds all computation.

– William Paley, Natural Theology (1802)

William Paleythinks that he’s still got some arguing left to do

he sees the problem that Hume sees with analogies too...

1. Human Artefacts have characteristic Y

2 Natural Objects also have characteristic Y

3. Human artefacts have Y because they have characteristic Z

4. Therefore, natural objects also have characteristic Z

Simple Argument from Analogy

William Paleyhe’s going to talk about design again

but he’s going to talk about design for a purpose

1. Natural objects display ‘design-like’ properties

2. Design-like properties are the result of intelligent design

3. Therefore, Natural objects are the product of design

Paley’s Argument

Do you see how he carefully avoids making any reference or comparison. He just sticks to

observations.

design is what?what marks something as designed is that it has a ‘role’

a telos

a purpose

EXAMPLEsword-billed hummingbirdwithout its long thin beak it would be unable to feed on the flowers that grow in their habitat

if one was born with a beak slightly the wrong length it couldn’t feed

on a wider scale species would go extinct

& there’s more...this is only one tiny example of complexity

we could think of many more

NB: for Paley; precise complexity + relation to purpose = purposive designthis must be ‘God’

So What Paley?well this means he avoids the problems of the other argument, the argument from analogy

we need to ask again, DO WE FIND THIS CONVINCING ?

Is that it?lets check his premises:

1. Natural objects display ‘design-like’ properties

• 2. Design-like properties are the result of intelligent design

• 3. Therefore, Natural objects are the product of design

a priori / a posteriori

?

Evolutionary

Theorya theory of gradual evolution over

a long period by the natural selection of

those varieties of an organism slightly better adapted to the

environment and hence more likely to produce descendants...

EXAMPLE - back to our bird

sword-billed hummingbirdits beak shape is quite simply the only one that works

one without its long thin beak it would have dies and so not passed on its less suitable design to offspring

if one was born with a beak slightly the wrong length it couldn’t feed

on a wider scale species would go extinct

so...we are given another option to explain the ‘purposive’ design or complex functionality exhibited in nature

it is there because anything that didn’t ‘work’ (and so didn’t look designed) have died out

anything that fits its purpose (survival & reproduction) does so...

Final thoughtclearly this does not show that intelligent design is not still the case

there is nothing about evolution that explicitly denies the idea of a creator

but the onus must lie with advocates of ID as if there was some guiding force in the evolutionary process there are several anomalies that require an explanation...

Final thoughtthis is not to say there are no answers to these questions, but it is worth bearing this in mind when considering the contemporary debate...

Dawkins& the rise of reductionist science

Dawkins’ work

QuickTime™ and aH.264 decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Dawkins

teleological

Spiritual