Skip to main content

The Teleological Argument by David Hume

In the excerpt by David Hume on the Teleological Argument, he lays out the main points of the argument is kind of a Compare and contrast type manner. I found it a bit easier to follow this way. What I got from the Teleological Argument is that because there is so much detail and purpose in the world, we must reason this with the justification of a creator or God. Hume goes on to argue on the topic of us not knowing if our amazing is actually truly amazing. He talks about how, as the people of this universe, we don't have another universe to compare ours to. So he's making the point that we don't know if our actually being in this universe is such wonder things if there's nothing to reference to. He mentions not only our being, but the things that we witness in nature as well. He also brings up the point that the Teleological Argument states that God is all knowing, but his believes different. He talks about the belief that there is only one God responsible for the "design" of everything, and how the possibility of there being multiple Gods isn't brought up under the Teleological Argument. Also, it is assumed through the Teleological Argument that God is one hundred percent good. Out of all the points Hume made against the Teleological Argument, I find most relevance in the point that there is no other reference universe to compare ours to. This is something I never really considered or thought  about on a deeper scale. You can not say something is the best of it's kind if there is nothing else in existence to compete with it. This one point in the argument definitely leaves the readers with something to consider when thinking about, and analyzing the loop holes within the Teleological Argument.

Comments

  1. Jasmine WinebargerSeptember 21, 2017 at 8:19 PM

    I also have never thought about our universe that way. There really is no other comparison to it, so is it actually a good universe? This deeper understanding is a perspective that I too never thought about. How can we say something is great without knowing a standard. Is it just great because this is all we know? Are there other universes out there that we have not discovered?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Leah L. MorrisSeptember 22, 2017 at 6:06 AM

    I agree as well that we do not know if there exists other universes, therefore we have nothing to compare ours to. However, does that even matter? We live in this universe, on this earth and within this reality. Grasping at theoretical ideas is useless in the realm of our reality now. We may never know if there exists other universes, or we may never possess the ability to reach other universes if they do exist. Therefore, we should focus more on our own universe and reality. We can only judge what is good by the parameters of our own understanding. Another point I agree with is whether God is all knowing and all good. On closer examination of Hebrew, Christian and Islamic spiritual text we find that those attributes are ones that we as humans have given to God and not so much what God has given to Himself. At least not in the way we understand them. A example of this is the saying "God is all knowing," yet in Hebrew and Christian scriptures God cannot be tempted by sin but man can. Therefore if God cannot be tempted, He can't understand sin which means technically he can't be all knowing. Hume's definitely makes some interesting and thoughtful points!

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousSeptember 22, 2017 at 7:33 PM

    I really enjoyed your point about our inability to compare and contrast our universe to any other and thus leaves us with this gaping hole of the unknown. It also somewhat depicts the arrogance that we unknowingly harbor as a human race. We seek to dominate nature and the universe with our exploration and domestication of our world. But his could all fall apart at any moment. And because it has not yet, it leaves us to not seek a higher understanding of expecting in the future it could. Just as Professor Maloney touched on in class, in science there is the term 'law', but a law is not really a law in the sense that it is set in stone. There could come a day where an experiment is performed and it is the anomaly to the entire set of 'laws' that have been created. So just because we are the only universe we know, and this universe meets our every need and expectation, that does not necessarily mean that there are not other universes much more efficient, safer, cleaner, etc. than ours.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Seven Ways

Udayana states that there are seven ways to prove that God is in existence; effects, atomic combination, suspension, human skills, authoritative knowledge, Revelation, and atoms. He also calls Him the "all-knowing, imperishable God." He is imperishable God because he is the only one who could create atoms because humans are not able to. Also, humans can not break atoms or destroy them and he is stating that the only person that can do that is God because he created atoms. He mentions the difference between the cause and effect to validate if there is a God. He brings up the argument that "Things like the earth must have a cause, because they are produced by a body (101)." Some deity had to have made the earth for their pleasure. He also relies on objections to prove that God is real. Udayana does bring up good ideas to prove that God is real. The best argument to me is that he created atoms. Humans are unable to destroy atoms or to create them; so they had to be...
1 comment
Read more

The Five Ways

How can we justify the existence of God? Aristotle proposed an argument of an eternal universe and a temporary universe. He questions if the universe is one that has always been or one that is temporarily here for a moment in time. Many ponder the question and often go back and forth between answers, but nevertheless, many can agree that either way, the universe must have a cause or an overall creator and this is what St. Thomas Aquinas argues in, "The Five Ways." The five reasons are as follows: “The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain and evident to our senses that some things are in motion.” Motion is caused by a movement of an object or person, but who does the initial movement? This is the question that must be answered. If there is motion, who is the mover? Who has created this cause and effect relationship? This leads us to the second reason of evidence: “The second way is from the formality of efficient causation.” Who started th...
2 comments
Read more

Is the Concept of Ultimate Reality Coherent

     Ultimate reality is dependent on a human beings's perspective. Ultimate reality, or the concept of God are compiled of different beliefs  and conceptual models. Questions are raised with  transcendent reality in  nature and existence. Chad Meister, addresses some of these questions. Humans desire to escape the suffering of this world with the faith and belief that another more perfect existence is obtainable where the flaws of this world does not exist (89). Wainwright states that from human beings needs and experiences came the concept of ultimate reality. Advaita Vedanta takes the Hinduism traditions of Upanishadic to interptet the concept of ultimate reality. Upanishadic traditions, such as the teaching of Brahman, could be traslated as ultimate reality. The world is simutaniously external and unchanging whole, and a individuated plurality that is constantly morphing or changing. Vedanta had taken up this particular insight and gives empahasis on th...
1 comment
Read more