2. Teleological Arguments: are often referred to as ‘design arguments.’
Aquinas’ Design Argument
P1: Objects are observed to be ordered and act for ends: some have
minds, and some don’t.
P2: An object that acts for a goal or end that doesn’t have a mind must be
the result of someone with a mind (understanding).
P3: So there’s a being with a mind/understanding that designed all
mindless objects that act for an end.
C2: Hence, God exists.
Paley’s Design Argument: An analogy of watches with an ability to tell time
compared to organisms with abilities in survival; can be considered an abductive
O: A watch with complex and intricate parts is found on a “heath” (beach).
H1: Randomness Hypothesis
H2: Design Hypothesis
Likelihood Principle? ... ONE WOULD EXPECT H2
O2: Organisms have even more complex and intricate parts than watches.
H3: Random Hypothesis
H4: Design Hypothesis
Only Game in Town Fallacy gives another possibility…
H5: Evolution by Natural Selection (Not random because organisms are
favoured by natural conditions more than others)
Hume’s Criticism: Poking fun of Paley, uses induction and analogy proving
Humanscirculatetheirblood Humanscirculatetheirblood . Can’t just
compare two things Hume says arguments are stronger or weaker relative to how close the analogue
(humans) is to the target (dogs & plants). Hence this argument is very weak.
I’ve observed X number of other Universes be designed
Hence, our Universe was designed.
X sample is zero! Lol
Darwin’s Two-Part Theory
(1) Tree of Life: All (almost) present day life and organisms are related
(2) Natural Selection: This is the preliminary explanation for evolution
3 Conditions for Natural Selection
iii. Heritability – necessary for traits passed down
O1: Two students turn in word for word identical term papers
H1: By chance, the two students independently wrote up identical papers
(functional, by nature)
H2: The students cheated from a common source on the Internet
(arbitrary, same ancestry)
Principle of Common Cause: If two things display intricate similarities, one
would expect and believe the scenario with common cause (ancestry, arbitrary)
as opposed to differing causes (functional, by chance).
Ex. Gould and the Panda’s Thumb: