The Teleological Argument For The Existence Of God

would without a doubt be a logical contradiction according to the atheist. There is also the

However, opinions vary from person to person. Some may believe in one God (theism), some may believe in many gods (polytheism), believe that the universe is God (pantheism) and the belief that there is no God (atheism). I do believe in only one God, and that he exists. Atheists have long argued on the existence of God, they have constantly asked the questions about the evidences and proofs of the existence of God. First of all, they deserve to be congratulated because they have shunned blindly accepting a faith; rather going on to a reason based on logic and evidence. How I would establish an argument would be based

William Paley’s teleological argument (also known as the argument from design) is an attempt to prove the existence of god. This argument succeeds in proving that while existence was created by an aggregation of forces, to define these forces, as a conscious, rational, and ultimately godlike is dubious. Although the conclusions are valid, the argument makes several logical errors. The teleological argument relies on inductive reasoning, rendering the argument itself valid, but unsound. The argument fails to apply its own line of reasoning to itself, resulting in infinite regression. Beyond the scope of its logical flaws, the arguments content lacks accurate comparisons. The argument hinges on a

Summarize and give an example for either the Cosmological or Teleological Proof for God’s existence.

The design argument is also referred to at the Teleological Argument stemmed from the Greek work ‘Telos’ meaning end or purpose. It is an ‘A posterior’ argument (from experience) based on our empirical senses and it is synthetic meaning that it is from observation. The argument is also inductive meaning there a number of possible conclusions. The main basis of the Teleological argument is based on a designer commonly known as ‘the classical God of theism’ (hereafter referred to as God)

The third argument for God’s existence is the ontological argument. This argument is unlike the cosmological and teleological arguments in that it does not argue from evidence in the natural world. Thus, it is not a “cause and effect” argument.

If you look at the delicate fabric of a leaf; well balanced and with the purpose of breathing for the plant, it can only convince you of the existence of God. The pecking order of the animals also show a pre-planned hierarchy of animals. It is a well-balanced system that resembles the gears of a watch. The world and universe have natural laws. Things depend on the effects of other things. There exists a cooperation in the universe that can only be contributed to intelligent

God’s existence cannot be proved nor disproved, but this is an attempt to refute the existence of this all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good being through an analysis of arguments and theories that try to prove or insinuate His reality.

There is no objective evidence to demonstrate the existence of nature’s creator. If we were to think the design argument was reasonable, then one must also take under consideration the amount of ‘creators’ are required

When you look at each of the arguments individually I can see how one might come to this conclusion. The cosmological argument only proves (if accepted) that there is a necessary being; however it does not prove that he is divine or perfect. The teleological argument by itself leaves us wondering why we also see chaos in the world around us. Not everything is orderly and perfect. You need to collectively look at each of the arguments prior to coming to a conclusion about the existence of God.

The teleological arguments talk about the existence of the universe, which is based from telos which means purpose or end. There is a great chance that the universe was created by a smart, brilliant trying to accomplish a purpose. In our readings, and our classes discussion we have read a lot about the teleological argument for the existence of god, our readings mentioned about William Paley, and it said that William Paley compared the universe to a watch, which has many parts that can work together that can create a purpose of the universe. Aside from the universe, and the design there is another intelligent being and that person us called God. This argument, is a form of an

The ontological argument is a debate for God’s existence established absolutely on reason. According to this disagreement, there is no need to go out looking for physical confirmation of God’s presence; If we just believe we will be able to realize that he does absolutely exist.

“The problem of evil” has been the most powerful argument going against God’s existence. The core argument is whether the occurrence of evil in the world is an indication that God has never existed or questions the reason to believe in such a God. Since God has been understood from tradition to be omnipotent and supremely good, the existence of evil raises questions on His existence. This paper compares and contrasts the ontological and the teleological arguments of God’s existence with the problem of evil argument about God’s non-existence.

The question is that is it possible to prove the existence of God in a strictly scientific? Answer is incredibly straightforward that there is no individual in the world who could come back with a solid proof whether God exists or not. One of the primary difficulties is the lack of a general characterization of the existence or nonexistence of which is required to be proved. First of all, for the benefit of further narrative, I would like to give the most general definition of "God" as far as possible including all possible variations. Consider our world as a great computer stylish game or a social network. For such a system may well be the one who designed it, created, wrote and performs systemic organization (Everitt N.p.). If you doubt the presence of Facebook creator and administrator of this network, it will look at least strange.

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.