PHILOSOPHY ESSAY PLANS;
Design Argument:
8 marker:
1. Aquinas’ 5th way and a posteriori
2. Paley’s analogy
3. Modern interpretations, ie Swinburne and fine-tuning
30 marker plan:
1. Strengths of analogy
- Paley draws an analogy between the world and a watch and states that if we came across
a watch on a heath we would assume it hadn’t always been there and that there is a
watchmaker due to its intricate design and purpose. Paley then argues the same logic
applies to the universe itself due to its intricate detail and design, so Paley argues there
must be a Designer.
- Only God can logically fit the role of the Designer - designer requires a mind and must be
distinct from the universe.
- This is convincing as it avoids problems associated when trying to reach conclusions
about God’s nature - problems with univocal and equivocal language.
- Instead, the analogy draws upon a posteriori evidence from God’s creations in order to
deduce his nature and draw meaningful conclusions about the Designer.
2. Aesthetic Principle
- Tennant draws upon two principles to demonstrate the strengths of the design argument.
- The aesthetic principle essentially argues that the world possesses a natural beauty
beyond what is necessary for survival to the extent that there must be a Designer.
- This beauty could not have evolved as a result of natural selection due to the fact that it is
not necessary in order to survive.
- Whilst some argue the problem of evil undermines this idea, in reality the existence of
suffering only furthers the idea that the world is beautiful.
- This point forms the basis of the Irenaean theodicy which argues that through suffering
individuals can reach moral perfection, develop important characteristics, and experience
God’s grace. Moreover suffering enables higher goods such as compassion and courage
to be experienced.
- Through suffering eternal life can be attained which in essence is beautiful.
3. Anthropic Principle
- Tennant’s second principle argues that the universe was made for the purpose of
supporting human life and that if the universe was the slightest part different human life
would not exist.
- And so, due to the rarity of this occurring by chance it can be argued there must exist an
omnipotent and omnibenevolent Designer.
, - Although some argue evolution provides the explanation as to why the universe perfectly
supports human life this argument cannot be used to explain the existence of temporal
order such as the laws of nature which have enabled evolution to take place.
4. Argument from Probability
- The final strength is most commonly associated by Swinburne who uses the cosmic fine-
tuning argument to show why there must be a Designer God.
- In that the world which exists today could not have occurred by chance and that it is a far
more probable explanation that God exists as the Designer (Occam’s razor).
- Swinburne also puts forward the cumulative argument which states that when all the
differing arguments for God’s existence are put together the probability that God
increases further.
1. Problem of Evil and Suffering
- It can be argued that the world cannot possibly have a Designer due to the extent of evil
which is present within the world, particularly when trying to prove the existence of the
God of Classical Theism this raises many questions.
- Both Mackie and Hume have put forward their arguments for the problem of evil known
as the logical problem of evil and the evidential problem of evil. These both essentially
argue that omnipotent and omnibenevolent and this cannot coexist with evil.
- However, a flaw in both arguments is that they look at the argument for God’s existence
from an outsider’s perspective and they fail to acknowledge the theodicies which
compellingly explain why evil exists. For example, as shown through the Irenauen
theodicy it is through evil that humans can develop vital virtues such as compassion and
courage (a world with these virtues and evil is greater than an all good world), and
suffering paves the way for eternal life.
2. Hume’s critique
- Hume criticises the nature of the argument in that it is inductive and makes a leap of faith
to assume through analogy that the world has a Designer.
- Hume accepts that we can infer a watch has a designer due to our repeated experience of
a designer bringing about the arrangement of parts for a purpose; however, we do not
have experience of this within nature, we need experience of the origins of worlds which
we do not have (why are cosmologists then able to make scientific conclusions?)
- Hume argues if God is the designer we can infer things about his nature from the universe
including he is not infinity as the world is not infinite, the designer is not perfect (so
cannot be God), can’t infer the designer is one person, etc. - essentially doesn’t show God
is the designer.
- Hume also argues there is much spatial disorder (regularities of co-presence) to the extent
that it is difficult to call the world ordered. However, it can be established that this
problem does not arise when using design arguments which look to regularities of
, succession, in that science cannot explain the existence of natural laws and they are never
disordered.
Synoptic link:
- Swinburne’s cumulative argument is strengthened through the idea of realised
eschatology in the New Testament.
- This is most obvious within Luke whereby it is made clear the Kingdom of God has
arrived with the birth of the messiah and that now humanity can receive judgement and
subsequent eternal life.
- And so, it can be said that the incarnation of God through Jesus acts as further proof that
God must exist.
Cosmological Argument:
8 marker:
1. Aquinas’ 3 ways
2. A posteriori
3. Kalam Argument
30 marker:
1. Reductio ad absurdum and infinite regression
- One somewhat compelling idea behind the cause of the universe is the idea of infinite
regression. This essentially argues the universe has existed infinitely, so there is no first
cause and subsequently God is not required to explain the existence of the universe.
- However, Aquinas’ compellingly rejects this idea through ‘reductio ad absurdum’ - if
there were an infinite chain of first cause, there would be no chain of causes, and
subsequently nothing would exist.
- The Kalam Argument (al-Kindi, al-Ghazali, and WLC) also demonstrates deductively
that there must be a first cause as shown through scientific discovery of the Big Bang.
- Therefore, we can conclude there must be a first cause, and God logically only fits this
criteria.
2. Principle of Sufficient Reason
- Leibniz’s principle of sufficient reason argues that everything within the world requires a
reason for its existence and this applies when considering the universe itself.
- Leibniz argues that a sequence of contingent facts cannot be used as a sufficient reason to
explain another contingent fact, so we must look beyond the sequence of causes and the
reason must be a necessary being.
- Leibniz then concludes only God can fit the criteria of the necessary being and only God
provides a complete explanation for the existence of the universe.
Design Argument:
8 marker:
1. Aquinas’ 5th way and a posteriori
2. Paley’s analogy
3. Modern interpretations, ie Swinburne and fine-tuning
30 marker plan:
1. Strengths of analogy
- Paley draws an analogy between the world and a watch and states that if we came across
a watch on a heath we would assume it hadn’t always been there and that there is a
watchmaker due to its intricate design and purpose. Paley then argues the same logic
applies to the universe itself due to its intricate detail and design, so Paley argues there
must be a Designer.
- Only God can logically fit the role of the Designer - designer requires a mind and must be
distinct from the universe.
- This is convincing as it avoids problems associated when trying to reach conclusions
about God’s nature - problems with univocal and equivocal language.
- Instead, the analogy draws upon a posteriori evidence from God’s creations in order to
deduce his nature and draw meaningful conclusions about the Designer.
2. Aesthetic Principle
- Tennant draws upon two principles to demonstrate the strengths of the design argument.
- The aesthetic principle essentially argues that the world possesses a natural beauty
beyond what is necessary for survival to the extent that there must be a Designer.
- This beauty could not have evolved as a result of natural selection due to the fact that it is
not necessary in order to survive.
- Whilst some argue the problem of evil undermines this idea, in reality the existence of
suffering only furthers the idea that the world is beautiful.
- This point forms the basis of the Irenaean theodicy which argues that through suffering
individuals can reach moral perfection, develop important characteristics, and experience
God’s grace. Moreover suffering enables higher goods such as compassion and courage
to be experienced.
- Through suffering eternal life can be attained which in essence is beautiful.
3. Anthropic Principle
- Tennant’s second principle argues that the universe was made for the purpose of
supporting human life and that if the universe was the slightest part different human life
would not exist.
- And so, due to the rarity of this occurring by chance it can be argued there must exist an
omnipotent and omnibenevolent Designer.
, - Although some argue evolution provides the explanation as to why the universe perfectly
supports human life this argument cannot be used to explain the existence of temporal
order such as the laws of nature which have enabled evolution to take place.
4. Argument from Probability
- The final strength is most commonly associated by Swinburne who uses the cosmic fine-
tuning argument to show why there must be a Designer God.
- In that the world which exists today could not have occurred by chance and that it is a far
more probable explanation that God exists as the Designer (Occam’s razor).
- Swinburne also puts forward the cumulative argument which states that when all the
differing arguments for God’s existence are put together the probability that God
increases further.
1. Problem of Evil and Suffering
- It can be argued that the world cannot possibly have a Designer due to the extent of evil
which is present within the world, particularly when trying to prove the existence of the
God of Classical Theism this raises many questions.
- Both Mackie and Hume have put forward their arguments for the problem of evil known
as the logical problem of evil and the evidential problem of evil. These both essentially
argue that omnipotent and omnibenevolent and this cannot coexist with evil.
- However, a flaw in both arguments is that they look at the argument for God’s existence
from an outsider’s perspective and they fail to acknowledge the theodicies which
compellingly explain why evil exists. For example, as shown through the Irenauen
theodicy it is through evil that humans can develop vital virtues such as compassion and
courage (a world with these virtues and evil is greater than an all good world), and
suffering paves the way for eternal life.
2. Hume’s critique
- Hume criticises the nature of the argument in that it is inductive and makes a leap of faith
to assume through analogy that the world has a Designer.
- Hume accepts that we can infer a watch has a designer due to our repeated experience of
a designer bringing about the arrangement of parts for a purpose; however, we do not
have experience of this within nature, we need experience of the origins of worlds which
we do not have (why are cosmologists then able to make scientific conclusions?)
- Hume argues if God is the designer we can infer things about his nature from the universe
including he is not infinity as the world is not infinite, the designer is not perfect (so
cannot be God), can’t infer the designer is one person, etc. - essentially doesn’t show God
is the designer.
- Hume also argues there is much spatial disorder (regularities of co-presence) to the extent
that it is difficult to call the world ordered. However, it can be established that this
problem does not arise when using design arguments which look to regularities of
, succession, in that science cannot explain the existence of natural laws and they are never
disordered.
Synoptic link:
- Swinburne’s cumulative argument is strengthened through the idea of realised
eschatology in the New Testament.
- This is most obvious within Luke whereby it is made clear the Kingdom of God has
arrived with the birth of the messiah and that now humanity can receive judgement and
subsequent eternal life.
- And so, it can be said that the incarnation of God through Jesus acts as further proof that
God must exist.
Cosmological Argument:
8 marker:
1. Aquinas’ 3 ways
2. A posteriori
3. Kalam Argument
30 marker:
1. Reductio ad absurdum and infinite regression
- One somewhat compelling idea behind the cause of the universe is the idea of infinite
regression. This essentially argues the universe has existed infinitely, so there is no first
cause and subsequently God is not required to explain the existence of the universe.
- However, Aquinas’ compellingly rejects this idea through ‘reductio ad absurdum’ - if
there were an infinite chain of first cause, there would be no chain of causes, and
subsequently nothing would exist.
- The Kalam Argument (al-Kindi, al-Ghazali, and WLC) also demonstrates deductively
that there must be a first cause as shown through scientific discovery of the Big Bang.
- Therefore, we can conclude there must be a first cause, and God logically only fits this
criteria.
2. Principle of Sufficient Reason
- Leibniz’s principle of sufficient reason argues that everything within the world requires a
reason for its existence and this applies when considering the universe itself.
- Leibniz argues that a sequence of contingent facts cannot be used as a sufficient reason to
explain another contingent fact, so we must look beyond the sequence of causes and the
reason must be a necessary being.
- Leibniz then concludes only God can fit the criteria of the necessary being and only God
provides a complete explanation for the existence of the universe.
