He also says there are a chain of causes and effects leading back to the beginning of the Universe. He did not believe in infinite regress, and so, for him, there had to be a first cause, and that first cause has to be God. Aquinas’ Cosmological argument has many positive points which could be used to prove the existence of God, and his argument is both logical and convincing. However, I believe there are some major flaws within it, and I hope to use these flaws to show that Aquinas’ Cosmological argument does not prove the existence of a God. The first point to Thomas Aquinas’ Cosmological argument is about Motion.
2. The teleological argument relies on a false premise, which is "order exists only in minds." If order exists only in minds, and if we don't have any examples of minds other than human minds, then we can't say God is ordered. Therefore,
Most biologists support the idea of evolution, by means of natural selection. Thus meaning scientists therefore therefore reject the first premise, arguing that evolution is not only an alternative explanation for the complexity of life but a better explanation with more supporting evidence. Of course, even if there is such a divine designer, this argument does not strictly prove that the designer has all the attributes
i) The teleological argument comes from the Greek word ‘telos’, which means end or purpose. The teleological argument argues that the existence and the complexity of the universe including the order, beauty and purpose of the world cannot be an accident. Therefore, an intelligent and purposeful God must have designed the universe; therefore, this proves Gods existence. There are two forms of the design argument; the first is the analogical argument, which includes the parts of the universe and human design. The second is the inductive argument.
Darwins dangerous idea was that he asked the question who created life, and his response was that no one did which in it's nature denies the supernatural explanation of the universe. Darwin focused on the idea of natural selection which presents the theory of evolution. the danger of his ideas were that they defied common sense, previously held religious beliefs and contradicted the bible.
He said in his 5th way that our knowledge of God did not come from God’s revelation – revealed theology, but from our observation of God’s creation – natural theology. He argued that dull matter cannot be self-ordering, so the order in which we see in the universe must be the result of an intelligent designer, and this designer must be God. He used the archer analogy to demonstrate this idea of design. He said that an archer aims towards a target, as would a designer towards the universe to create order. A further philosopher who put forward a version of the Design Argument is William Paley of the 18th century.
In this paper I will examine and evaluate Cleanthes’s argument from design to the existence of God. I argue that although I begin by examine Cleathes’s argument from design to the existence of God. Cleanthes, a character introduced by David Hume in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, tries to argue that the Universe was created by a designer, presumably God. According to Dan’s analysis at discussion, Cleanthes’s argument takes the following form: “ Premise 1 – The Universe resembles an artifact because: i) It shows a high level of complexity and ii) It has degree of apparently purposive organization Premise 2 – Artifacts are created by designers. Therefore, the Universe was created by a designer.
Explain Paley’s version of the teleological argument (25) The teleological argument, or the design argument, is an argument to prove the existence of God, it is an A Posteriori argument which attempts to show that the design, order, complexity and purpose of the universe imply the existence of a God who gives the world such characteristics. The design argument follows the logical pattern that when we see things that are manmade, which are in an ordered pattern, or are particularly beautiful, complex or which work well then we must infer that they have been created that way by an intelligent designer. We must see that these things do not arise by chance, therefore when we look at the natural world and see that there is order, beauty, complexity and purpose we can see that the natural world closely resembles human inventions and therefore must also have and intelligent designer. The only thing that is powerful enough to design something as complex as the universe must be God. Therefore, God exists.
Theist Stannard and Paley both start their arguments with the premise, that the universe has complex features, but Stannard proceed further the idea, that the universe is too complex to just happen by coincidence. Paley argues with his watch Analogy and if we would walk pass a watch we would assert that it was designed by an intelligent designer. For him and Stannard the only probable explanation for the universe’ existence is God. Paley maintains that everything which exhibits his 6 features of design, has to be designed by an intelligent designer. Both, the universe and a watch have several parts, these parts work together for a purpose, they are made with a specific material, the parts produce together regulated motion and if any part would be different, this motion wouldn’t be produced.
It is then concluded that it is not the result of chance, it must have been designed. The evidence from design points to a designer, this designer being God. ‘With such signs of forethought in the design of living creatures can you doubt they are the work of chance or design?’ The basic teleological argument states that the universe has order, purpose and regularity and the complexity of the universe shows evidence of design, such design implies a design and the designer of the universe is God. The basic assumption that there is order and design in the universe is made in the argument. It suggests that all things function to fulfil a specific purpose.