Donovan Implications

William Paley and David Hume’s argument over God’s existence is known as the teleological argument, or the argument from design. Arguments from design are arguments concerning God or some type of creator’s existence based on the ideas of order or purpose in universe. Hume takes on the approach of arguing against the argument of design, while Paley argues for it. Although Hume and Paley both provide very strong arguments, a conclusion will be drawn at the end to distinguish which philosophiser holds a stronger position. Throughout this essay I will be examining arguments with reference to their work from Paley’s “The Watch and the Watchmaker” and Hume’s “The Critique of the Teleological Argument”.

In Hume’s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion we are introduced to three characters that serve the purpose to debate God and his nature, more specifically, what can mankind infer about God and his nature. The three characters; Demea, Philo, and Cleanthes all engage in a debate concerning this question and they all serve the purpose of supporting their views on the subject. It is the “argument from design” put forth by Cleanthes that is the focal point of the discussion, and it is Demea and Philo who attempt to discredit it.

Fowler saw faith as greater than religious faith and viewed it as a “universal aspect of human existence” (Hutchison, 2015). The ultimate environment is an important element of Fowler’s theory. He saw faith as not only an internal image but also how one relates to that image. Faith is not an unchangeable image or idea, but a way of being. The six stages of

1. Examine the strengths and weaknesses of the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience. (18) 2. ‘The argument merely indicates the probability of God and this is of little value to a religious believer.’ Discuss. (12)

During the 1800th century, William Paley, an English philosopher of religion and ethics, wrote the essay The Argument from Design. In The Argument from Design, Paley tries to prove the existence of a supreme being through the development of a special kind of argument known as the teleological argument. The teleological argument is argument by analogy, an argument based on the similarities between two different subjects. This essay purposefully attempts to break down Paley’s argument and does so in the following manner: firstly, Paley’s basis for the teleological argument is introduced; secondly, Paley’s argument is derived and analyzed; thirdly, the connection between Paley’s argument and the existence of a supreme being is made; and

This author ascribes to the empiricism paradigm. This paradigm is similar to empirical knowing in that it is based on the premise that what is known can be verified through the senses, or

One burning and enduring problem in philosophy to which we have given considerable examination is the question of the existence of God--the superlative being that philosophers have defined and dealt with for centuries. After reading the classic arguments of St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas, the contentious assertions of Ernest Nagel, and the compelling eyewitness accounts of Julian of Norwich, I have been introduced to some of the most revered and referenced arguments for and against God's existence that have been put into text. All of them are well-thought and well-articulated arguments, but they have their holes. The question of God's true existence, therefore, is still not definitively answered and put to rest; the intensity of this

Intuition is being able have understanding without proof, evidence, or conscious reasoning. From this much knowledge can be gained. In his works Emerson speaks for us to “trust thyself,” meaning one should trust their instinct and what they think is right. Emerson also says “Absolve you to yourself…” This means one should set themselves free of guilt and shame and trust in what their becoming. Thoreau also speaks to this idea and says, “However mean your life is, meet it and live it…. It looks poorest when you are richest.” He is saying one should live there life no matter what other people think of it, because only that person may look different or weird but they are filled with a rich knowledge and and

The central problem of this paper that I am going to try to convince my atheist friend is that god existed. I will argue in favor of a higher being by first presenting and evaluating two argument that will be used to persuade my atheist friend. First I will explain Pascal’s argument. Second I will explain one of the arguments of Aquinas’s that is in favor of the existence of god. Then I am going to explain what’s the central difference between the two arguments is. I will conclude by stating whether I was successful in converting my atheist friend.

In this chapter, the author states that many feel that theology is unnecessary to understanding God. Most feel that they know more about God because of personal experiences. The author says he agrees with that to some degree; however, he feels that one is very limited with only the personal experience and without what he calls a map, which is what theology would be as related to the Christian religion. Without

The question of how I know what I know is a question that is one of the most difficult I have encountered. Much of what I know is based on logic and thinking. This is where I may veer off of the Christian Worldview slightly. I believe that God has given humans the ability to reason and think logically, and I use that as much as possible. I think that He intended for us to use our minds to find what we believe to be true, hoping that people would seek God when seeing that He is the only real truth. Cosgrove (2006) makes a great comment on secular humanism and a person’s ability to find value, and in

“Intuition and concepts therefore constitute the elements of all our cognition, so that neither concepts without intuition corresponding to them in some way nor intuition without concepts can yield a cognition. Both are either pure or

Most major arguments of God are rooted in the existence, or lack thereof. However there has been a continuous debate regarding the specific characteristics of God. In this debate, Charles Hartshorne, Alfred North Whitehead, and other the processed theologians oppose Anselm, Augustine, and other classic theologians. Although there are many points of disagreement, there are some characteristics for which both sides can agree upon. I will show one strong point of agreement and one strong point of opposition, and allow you the opportunity to decide for yourself how different, or similar, these two camps are.

Throughout the course of this essay we shall examine two of the major philosophical arguments for the existence of God. The arguments that we are going to focus on shall be the Design argument and the Ontological argument. We shall compare, evaluate and discuss both the Design (or teleological) argument for the existence of God and the Ontological Argument for the existence of God, as well as highlighting philosophical criticisms of both theories too. By doing so, we shall attempt to draw a satisfactory conclusion and aim gain a greater understanding of the respective theories and their criticisms of each theory.

There are no mental processes which are distinct from intelligent acts. The operations of the mind are not merely represented by intelligent acts, but are the same as intelligent acts. Thus, an act of remembering, dreaming, knowing, or willing is not merely a clue to some hidden mental process or intellectual operation, it is how that mental process or intellectual operation is defined. A logical proposition is not merely a clue to a particular mode of reasoning, it is that mode of reasoning.