![REED LII [Recovered].pptx](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/reedliirecovered-230806104208-ee6c1963-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
![December issue[1]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/decemberissue1-110217094201-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
Teleological argument
- 1. ‘A’ Level Philosophyand Ethics Notes The Teleological Argument for The Existence of God τελος Telos Goal, target, purpose The Teleological Argument (Argument from Design) 1. Ancient History Cicero is one of the earliest philosophers to discuss the idea of design in nature. In De Natura Deorum he writes, "What could be more clear or obvious when we look up to the sky and contemplate the heavens, than that there is some divinity or superior intelligence?" quoted in Davies, B. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion, p.94 Plato speaks of an "intelligible living creature" which is the model by which the Creator works (Timaeus 39). Thomas Aquinas also discusses the evidence of Design in creation. In the fifth of his Five Ways he says, "Everything operates as to a design. This design is from God." In Summa Theologiae he links causation to purpose. Causation gives things their perfections, "Something therefore causes in all other things their being, their goodness, and whatever other perfections they have. And that is what we call God" This is then linked to the concept of purpose, "Goal directed behaviour is observed in all bodies obeying natural laws, even when they lack awareness…. But nothing lacking awareness can tend to a goal except it be directed by someone with awareness and understanding; the arrow, for example, requires an archer. Everything in nature, therefore, is directed to its goal by someone with understanding, and this we call God" Aquinas argues, from the first three of his ways, that something causes things to come into existence. He goes on to argue that because everything appears to work to a purpose (c.f. Aristotle's Ideas of Causality:- Causality - Aristotle used the example of rain: 1. Material Cause - the clouds 2. Efficient Cause - The process by which the rain is made 3. Formal Cause - The form, or nature, of the rain is to fall Final Cause - The rain provides water for plants and animals to grow. And that the purpose is from some intelligent being. This being is God.
- 2. The Teleological Argumentfor the Existence of God Aquinas is arguing for Design qua Regularity - that there is something regulating the universe. This would be similar to the gardener in the parable by John Wisdom (see Jordan, Lockyer and Tate, Philosophy of Religion for 'A' Level, p.14). The gardener maintains the garden, keeping it weed free and neat and tidy. The rotation of the planets, and the mechanisms of the universe, appear to be the result of a regulating intelligence:- Boethius, a sixth century Roman philosopher wrote:- There are three types of music. The first type is the music of the universe, the second, that of the human being, and the third type is that type which is created by certain instruments… Now the first type, that is the music of the universe, is best observed in those things which one perceives in heaven itself, or in the structure of the elements, or in the diversity of the seasons. How could it possibly be that such a swift heavenly machine move so silently in its course? The orbits of the stars are joined by such a harmony that nothing so perfectly structured can be imagined. Thus there must be some fixed order of musical modulation in this celestial motion. Quoted in Wilson-Dixon, Christian Music, p40 2. William Paley (1743 - 1805) This is the most famous form of the Argument by Design. Paley's idea of the watch is a little redundant in the world of the quartz watch, but there are other useful analogies. "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 be the contrary, it had lain there for ever; nor would it perhaps be very easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I 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 which I had before given, that, for anything I knew, the watch might always have been there. Yet why should not this answer serve for the watch, as well as for the stone? Why is it not as admissible in the second case as in the first? For this reason, and for no other, viz., that, when we came to inspect the watch, we perceive (what we would not discover in the stone) that its several parts are framed and put together for a purpose, e.g. that they are so formed and adjusted to produce motion, and that motion so regulated as to point out the hour of the day; that, if the different parts had been differently shaped from what they are, if a different size from what they are, or placed after any other manner, or in any other order than that in which they are placed either no motion at all would have been carried on in the machine, or none which would have answered these that is now served by it. William Paley, Natural Theology Oxford 1838 Suppose I should find a 35mm Automatic Camera. It has infrared focussing, automatic exposure control and automatic film advance. It is completely self-contained - a true "point-and-shoot" camera. Paley suggests that to argue that the camera happened "by accident" is nonsense. The camera shows obvious signs of having been designed. 2
- 3. The Teleological Argumentfor the Existence of God Yet people suggest that the human eye, with its automatic focus and exposure, was not the result of an intelligent design. The argument is in two stages. § It tries to establish that there is order and purpose in the universe. § It then makes the step to the conclusion that there is something divine behind this order and purpose. 3. And now..? The argument "to design" notes that nature appears to plan in advance for the needs of animals and plants. The possible randomness of sub atomic particles would count against life on earth - there appears to be a pattern or order at the smallest level. Richard Swinburne suggests that the modern developments in biochemistry actually support the Teleological Argument. He notes that the work done in biochemistry appears to suggest that evolution could not be as random as the "Natural Selection" theory maintains. Terms such as "anti-chance" have been introduced into the discussion, and some have argued that the existence of the Universe is "beyond chance". F. R. Tennant argues that the Universe is "saturated" with beauty at every level. The pattern that can be detected from the sub- atomic to the universal level is seen as evidence for some sort of non- randomness in the Universe (see Paul Davies, quoted on p.71 in see Jordan, Lockyer and Tate, Philosophy of Religion for 'A' Level). In reply, Dawkins and others have continued to argue for a random, yet self-arranging universe. 4. What are the odds for a random universe? Harold Morowitz is a biochemist at George Mason University in the USA. He uses a chart of all the chemical reactions that occur in the body to study the way that life itself works. He looked at the problem of probability for the existence of life in the Universe. He noted that there is an evens chance of heads or tails. § A 1/1015 chance is so remote as to become completely unlikely. § A 1/1050 chance could not happen in 15 billion years (the age of the Universe). Dr Morowitz looked at the complexity of protein molecules, and concluded that the odds for such an object to happen by chance stand at 1/10236. This takes into account all the atoms in the universe, and the chances that the right ones could come together to form a protein molecule. "The universe would have to be trillions of times older, and trillions of times larger, for a protein molecule to have occurred by random chance." 3
- 4. The Teleological Argumentfor the Existence of God Morowitz’s research is a bit like saying that you could toss 4 billion coins in the air. The odds of them all landing heads up is the same as the odds for that protein molecule to exist at all. For the protein molecule to exist, you would need more than 15 billion years, and more atoms. In Other Words – there aren’t enough atoms, and there isn’t enough time. Science and Creation Scientists are divided over the possibility of design and purpose in the Universe. § Some argue that the universe is entirely random (see Dawkins et al). They say that life is more probable that we might think, and that it occurs throughout the universe. § However, despite years of searching, SETI (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence) has failed to find any evidence for life anywhere other than on earth. SETI is searching for an intelligible radio signal from somewhere in the Universe. Much of what is detected by SETI’s radio telescopes is simply random static. However, if SETI should detect something non- random (even something simple like a dot-dash morse code signal) they would regard it as evidence of intelligence in the universe. A signal “2-2-4” would involve 10 bytes of digital information. This simple signal would be accepted by SETI as intelligent. DNA involves 4 billion bytes of information. Francis Crick (one of the scientists who discovered DNA in the 1950s) is quoted as saying: "To the honest man ... the origin of life appears ... to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have to be satisfied to get it going" http://www.chelt.ac.uk/gdn/origins/life/ 4