Some philosophers, such as Plato, proposed a divine Artificer as the designer; others, including Aristotle, rejected that conclusion in favor of a more naturalistic teleology. In the Middle Ages, the Islamic philosopher Averroes introduces a teleological argument. Later, a teleological argument is the fifth of Saint Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways, his rational proofs for the existence of God. The teleological argument was continued by empiricists in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, who believed that the order in the world suggested the existence of God. William Paley developed these ideas with his version of the watch maker analogy.
Hume used the inductive method, which goes from the particular to the universal. Hume believes that knowledge is likely. Descartes believed in the existence of innate ideas in man, undeniable truths and safe, but Hume denies, since for him the human mind at birth is like a blank book in which you type through the experience (Spicker, 2000). Rationalism is a philosophical theory which originates in the thought of Descartes (1596-1650, French philosopher). Do not forget either that rationalism did not involve the overcoming of religious thought; on the contrary, the notion of God was very important in the rationalist philosophical systems (Joachim, 2006).
Explain key criticisms of the Cosmological Argument Although with each of his ‘ways’ in the Cosmological argument Thomas Aquinas gave what he believed to be evidence to back his points up, the argument was still open to criticism and did receive it. One of the first criticisms of the argument was around the ideology of infinite regress. Aquinas believed that the idea of infinite regress was not possible – the cause and effect chain had to have a beginning, which would have been caused by God (the first cause.) William Lane Craig (1949-) agreed with this idea, stating that infinite regress cannot exist in actuality. For example, if a library was to house an infinite number of books and a book was taken off the shelf, or the library was completely emptied, it would still have to contain an infinite number of books, which therefore shows that infinite regress cannot exist within our living universe.
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.
Notable philosophers include, Saint Anslem and William Paley, who both argued the existence of G-d. Saint Anslem in his Ontological Argument writes several reasons for the existence. One of them is the Teleological Argument. Paley in Natural Theology expands on Anslem’s claim of a designer. In addition, another notable proponent of this argument was Blaise Pascal, who, in The Pensées, argued for the belief of G-d and the benefits of this belief, not His existence. This argument became known as Pascal’s Wager.
Dawkins and Aquinas: Theology Whether it’s argumentative or sentimental, an author always aims to get a significant truth across to the reader. In the novel “The God Delusion,” Richard Dawkins analyzes many theories that theologians have developed about the existence of God and essentially squanders them. Through his unique sense of humor and his idea of “logic”, he gives reasons of why the theories of Thomas Aquinas, and other theories as well, are not well developed and are incorrect. Although he does raise some interesting points in his arguments, he does not address enough issues to completely reject the theories of God’s existence. God has a very broad meaning and the meaning varies from person to person.
This attitude reflects the commonly-held view amongst contemporary scientists that Freud's theories are unscientific. In this essay, I aim to argue that while Fish makes a valid point about Freud's use of the unconscious as a rhetorical device, to consider it as only a rhetorical device and to dismiss its importance as a scientific concept is not only unjustified, but also impractical in psychological theories of the mind. Freud's theories, I argue, are no less scientific than other theories in science. Before I assert my own arguments concerning this matter, I shall examine Fish's position in greater detail, in order to understand the extent of his claim. A rhetorical device, according to Fish, "is entirely constructed and stands without external support", and "that insofar as it has been installed at the centre of a structure of conviction it acquires the status of that which goes without saying and that against which nothing can be said".
This paper is to explain the Ontological argument, followed by the discussion of the objection and the response to the objection, and concludes with my opinion of the actual argument. The purpose of Saint Anselm’s Ontological argument, is to prove through 12 premises that God does exist in reality. Yet through objections, such as Gaunilo’s Parody, it will be shown that the Ontological argument contains flaws. Though there are substantial premises to the Ontological argument, the objection nevertheless rejects them; However, Anselm attempts to salvage his argument by then refusing the parody. The Ontological argument is set up to prove God exists in reality by justifying it as a priori, which in this instance means that God is understood to exist in reality even though Anselm has not witnessed God himself.
He stated that only souls could be a primary mover, therefore whatever “moved,” or “caused,” the universe must be a soul) and Aristotle (who stated that all changes must come from some ultimate source and that it is not possible for there not to be a first cause) outlined similar arguments in the past. In particular, Aquinas laid out five ways or “proofs,” in which he could use to prove the existence of a God. Three of his proofs came to be the Cosmological Argument, but specifically two of these proofs, whilst similar in layout, are best suited to analyse their effectiveness. To begin, the first way; The Unmoved Mover, is an argument based specifically from the motion of the universe. Aquinas states that; Everything in the world is moving or changing, Nothing can move or change by itself, There cannot be an infinite regress of things changing other things, Therefore there must be a first (prime) mover/changer and this mover is called God.
The most influential philosophers related to continental philosophy are Martin Heidegger and Jean-Paul Sartre (Moore & Bruder, 2011). Some themes of existentialism are traditional and academic philosophies are sterile from the concerns of real life, the world is irrational, and the world is absurd in the sense that there are not explanations that can be given for the way that it is. The above are not all the themes for this school of thought but there are the most compelling (Moore & Bruder, 2011). The second type philosophy is known is pragmatic. Pragmatic philosophy is a type of philosophy that rejects the idea that there is such a thing as absolute truth (Moore & Bruder, 2011).