TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT ESSAY PLANNING
AQUINAS PROVES THAT G-D EXISTS
THE APPEARANCE OF PURPOSE IN THE UNIVERSE CAN BEST BE EXPLAINED BY CHANCE, NOT G-D
THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT HAS SUCCESSFULLY SURVIVED ALL CRITICISMS
HOW CONVINCING ARE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF G-D
TO WHAT EXTENT ARE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF G-D CONVINCING
TO WHAT EXTENT CAN TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS BE DEFENDED AGAINST THE CHALLENGE OF
CHANCE
TO WHAT EXTENT DOES WILLIAM PALEYS ARGUMENT FROM DESIGN PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF G-
D
BOTH:
TO WHAT EXTENT ARE AGRUMNETS BASED ON CAUSATION FOR THE EXISTENCE OF G-D
CONVINCING
THERE MUST BE A REASON TO ACCOUNT FOR TEH EXISTENCE OF THE UNIVERSE
ASSES THE CLAIM WE CAN PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF G-D THROUGH A POSTERIORI REASONING
, General question structure: asses the teleological argument
INTRO:
What is the teleological argument= a posteriori, synthetic, inductive argument that believes the
universe has been designed for a purpose
- Original arguments from Aquinas and Paley, later developed by Tennant and Swinburne
- Uses the design and structure in the world to suggest there must be a creator, and the creator
must be g-d
Can be critised with issues of chance and evolution
My line of argument: the teleological argument does successfully overcome its criticisms- might not be
perfect but it is the best that can be done for human understanding
PARA 1: AQUINAS’ 5TH WAY
FOR- aquinas proves the existence of g-d through the design argument
- He takes from Aristotles view of the final cause, that everything must have a purpose- focused
on what things are made for
- Summary of his thought process- everything in the world follows natural laws, if they follow
laws then they have a purpose, things that dont follow laws are directed by something else for
purpose so everything has a purpose and that must be guided by something- so G-D
Analogy of the arrow- to support his thinking
- Regularity of succession- his argument is based on the fact that certain laws lead to certain
results
- Everything is governed by something- an arrow (which cannot follow laws) is controlled by
something that can (archer) and therefore leads to its purpose
- There must be something that it is charge of purpose as a whole- that is g-d
AGAINST- criticisms of Aquinas’ 5th way
- John Stuart Mill- evil and suffering- evil within nature- some animals are designed to kill (teeth
and claws) to inflict pain- this goes against the loving nature of g-d
- Nature causes suffering- natural disasters
BUT- these criticisms, whilst valid, do not have an impact on Aquinas 5th way, as he is not questioning
the nature of the design, just whether or not there is a designer
AQUINAS PROVES THAT G-D EXISTS
THE APPEARANCE OF PURPOSE IN THE UNIVERSE CAN BEST BE EXPLAINED BY CHANCE, NOT G-D
THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT HAS SUCCESSFULLY SURVIVED ALL CRITICISMS
HOW CONVINCING ARE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF G-D
TO WHAT EXTENT ARE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF G-D CONVINCING
TO WHAT EXTENT CAN TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS BE DEFENDED AGAINST THE CHALLENGE OF
CHANCE
TO WHAT EXTENT DOES WILLIAM PALEYS ARGUMENT FROM DESIGN PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF G-
D
BOTH:
TO WHAT EXTENT ARE AGRUMNETS BASED ON CAUSATION FOR THE EXISTENCE OF G-D
CONVINCING
THERE MUST BE A REASON TO ACCOUNT FOR TEH EXISTENCE OF THE UNIVERSE
ASSES THE CLAIM WE CAN PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF G-D THROUGH A POSTERIORI REASONING
, General question structure: asses the teleological argument
INTRO:
What is the teleological argument= a posteriori, synthetic, inductive argument that believes the
universe has been designed for a purpose
- Original arguments from Aquinas and Paley, later developed by Tennant and Swinburne
- Uses the design and structure in the world to suggest there must be a creator, and the creator
must be g-d
Can be critised with issues of chance and evolution
My line of argument: the teleological argument does successfully overcome its criticisms- might not be
perfect but it is the best that can be done for human understanding
PARA 1: AQUINAS’ 5TH WAY
FOR- aquinas proves the existence of g-d through the design argument
- He takes from Aristotles view of the final cause, that everything must have a purpose- focused
on what things are made for
- Summary of his thought process- everything in the world follows natural laws, if they follow
laws then they have a purpose, things that dont follow laws are directed by something else for
purpose so everything has a purpose and that must be guided by something- so G-D
Analogy of the arrow- to support his thinking
- Regularity of succession- his argument is based on the fact that certain laws lead to certain
results
- Everything is governed by something- an arrow (which cannot follow laws) is controlled by
something that can (archer) and therefore leads to its purpose
- There must be something that it is charge of purpose as a whole- that is g-d
AGAINST- criticisms of Aquinas’ 5th way
- John Stuart Mill- evil and suffering- evil within nature- some animals are designed to kill (teeth
and claws) to inflict pain- this goes against the loving nature of g-d
- Nature causes suffering- natural disasters
BUT- these criticisms, whilst valid, do not have an impact on Aquinas 5th way, as he is not questioning
the nature of the design, just whether or not there is a designer
