Arguments for the Existence of God
The Nature of ‘Proof’
Proof can be thought of in different ways
o Being able to prove something true by definition, using logic
(deductive reasoning)
o Having so much evidence that a conclusion is thought so likely
to be true that it is accepted as fact, but not proven to be true
100%
o Proving something through a personal experience which is
more powerful than facts or evidence. R.M Hare calls this a
‘blik’ for religious people
The Design Argument : William Paley
Type of Argument
o a posteriori - based in observation and experiences
o inductive - conclusion is likely given the premises
o analogical - rooted in comparison between the watch and the
world
o based in natural theology - questions about God’s existence,
nature and attributes can be answered by using reason and
observation
The argument
o Coming across a watch we can observe ‘that its several parts
are framed and put together for a purpose’ - it has complex
parts each with a function and they work together for a
specific purpose
o So the watch must have been designed by a watch maker
o Through observation we can see the universe is complex,
exhibits regularity and has a purpose
o So the universe must have been designed by a universe
maker
o The designer of the universe must be much greater than the
designer of the watch (because the universe is far more
wondrous than a watch)
o The universe designer must be omnipotent → God
, o Paley compares this to the universe and gives examples from
nature to show the complexity of it, e.g the eye being
perfectly designed for sight.
o Argument is based on universe’s complexity, regularity,
purpose
complexity found in the natural world e.g. the eye is full
of intricate parts arranged to fulfil the purpose of
enabling us to see
regularity e.g. the regularity of the orbits of comets,
moons and planets and the seasons of the year
purpose for example birds wings and fins of a fish are
fitted for flying and swimming
o ‘Every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch,
exists in the works of nature’
Value for faith
o Uses logic and reason
o Provides evidence for faith in God from the world around us
o It is simple and easy to understand
o Gives a response to atheism
Strengths
o Richard Swinburne argues that a simpler argument which is
easier to understand is better. Employs Occam’s Razor - the
design argument is a better explanation for the existence of
God than anyone has for the non-existence of God
o Uses evidence from the world around us that people can
experience and understand
o Science also creates a conclusion based on the evidence
which tells us this is an acceptable way to make a reasonable
conclusion
o Hume’s criticism that evil’s existence undermines the belief in
a divine creator could be solved through a theodicy
Weaknesses
o David Hume speaks of the weakness of the analogy in
Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion
, argued that to discuss design in human terms is not an
acceptable analogy because by definition God
transcends understanding - the argument
anthropomorphises God and makes him too much like a
human being
the universe is more like a living organism which grows
and reproduces (rather than like a machine) so it is not a
sound comparison
o UNSUCCESSFUL because while the analogy may have some
minor flaws the point Paley is getting at which is that nature
has the same properties as man made things and so we must
assume that nature is DESIGNED by someone. but not a proof
just a probability
o WEAKNESS OF PALEYS CONCLUSION HUME multiple designers
- committee of Gods conclusion
o REPLY SWINBURNE OCKHAMS RAZOR - one god is a simpler
explanation and so is most probable
o BUT still just probability and not proof
o the world could have been designed by a lesser being - just
because the universe shows signs of being designed, it does
not necessarily mean that the designer must be omnipotent
o The existence of evil in the world suggests that the designer is
somehow limited or flawed which questions characteristics of
God
o The analogy is unsound because nature does not function like
a machine - it may not need a maker and the theory of
evolution suggests it is more similar to some sort of vegetable
and does not have any creator
o The theory is anthropomorphised : Paley explains the world
from the perspective of his human experience but it should
not be explained this way
o The universe could have developed by chance
The Cosmological Argument : Thomas Aquinas
Type of Argument
o a posteriori
o inductive - probabilistic
, The argument - Summa Theologica
o P1 = EVERYTHING IS CONTINGENT - CAN EXIST OR NOT EXIST
’are possible to be and not to be’
o P2 = IF EVERYTHING IS CONTINGENT THEN AT SOME TIME
THERE WAS NOTHING - BECAUSE THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A
TIME BEFORE ANYTHING HAD BEGUN TO EXIST
‘if everything is possible not to be, then at one
time there could have been nothing in existence’
o P3 = IF THERE WAS ONCE NOTHING, THEN NOTHING COULD
HAVE COME FROM NOTHING
o C1 = THEREFORE SOMETHING MUST EXIST NECESSARILY,
OTHERWISE NOTHING WOULD NOW EXIST, WHICH IS FALSE
‘there must exist something the existence of
which is necessary’
o P4 = EVERYTHING NECESSARY MUST BE EITHER CAUSED OR
UNCAUSED
o P5 = BUT THE SERIES OF NECESSARY BEINGS CANNOT BE
INFINITE OR THERE WOULD BE NO EXPLANATION OF THAT
SERIES
o C2 = THEREFORE, THERE MUST BE SOME UNCAUSED BEING
WHICH EXISTS OF ITS OWN NECESSITY
o C3 = BY THIS WE ALL UNDERSTAND GOD
‘this all men speak of as god’
Value for faith
VALUABLE
o Pope John Paul II said faith and reason are mutually supportive
‘faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit
rises to the contemplation of truth’
o Rational and empirically based - appeals to observation
o Consistent with biblical teaching ‘in the beginning God created
the heavens and earth’ Genesis → confirms teaching of a
guiding hand that is directing the whole of nature and human
lives in a purposeful way
The Nature of ‘Proof’
Proof can be thought of in different ways
o Being able to prove something true by definition, using logic
(deductive reasoning)
o Having so much evidence that a conclusion is thought so likely
to be true that it is accepted as fact, but not proven to be true
100%
o Proving something through a personal experience which is
more powerful than facts or evidence. R.M Hare calls this a
‘blik’ for religious people
The Design Argument : William Paley
Type of Argument
o a posteriori - based in observation and experiences
o inductive - conclusion is likely given the premises
o analogical - rooted in comparison between the watch and the
world
o based in natural theology - questions about God’s existence,
nature and attributes can be answered by using reason and
observation
The argument
o Coming across a watch we can observe ‘that its several parts
are framed and put together for a purpose’ - it has complex
parts each with a function and they work together for a
specific purpose
o So the watch must have been designed by a watch maker
o Through observation we can see the universe is complex,
exhibits regularity and has a purpose
o So the universe must have been designed by a universe
maker
o The designer of the universe must be much greater than the
designer of the watch (because the universe is far more
wondrous than a watch)
o The universe designer must be omnipotent → God
, o Paley compares this to the universe and gives examples from
nature to show the complexity of it, e.g the eye being
perfectly designed for sight.
o Argument is based on universe’s complexity, regularity,
purpose
complexity found in the natural world e.g. the eye is full
of intricate parts arranged to fulfil the purpose of
enabling us to see
regularity e.g. the regularity of the orbits of comets,
moons and planets and the seasons of the year
purpose for example birds wings and fins of a fish are
fitted for flying and swimming
o ‘Every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch,
exists in the works of nature’
Value for faith
o Uses logic and reason
o Provides evidence for faith in God from the world around us
o It is simple and easy to understand
o Gives a response to atheism
Strengths
o Richard Swinburne argues that a simpler argument which is
easier to understand is better. Employs Occam’s Razor - the
design argument is a better explanation for the existence of
God than anyone has for the non-existence of God
o Uses evidence from the world around us that people can
experience and understand
o Science also creates a conclusion based on the evidence
which tells us this is an acceptable way to make a reasonable
conclusion
o Hume’s criticism that evil’s existence undermines the belief in
a divine creator could be solved through a theodicy
Weaknesses
o David Hume speaks of the weakness of the analogy in
Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion
, argued that to discuss design in human terms is not an
acceptable analogy because by definition God
transcends understanding - the argument
anthropomorphises God and makes him too much like a
human being
the universe is more like a living organism which grows
and reproduces (rather than like a machine) so it is not a
sound comparison
o UNSUCCESSFUL because while the analogy may have some
minor flaws the point Paley is getting at which is that nature
has the same properties as man made things and so we must
assume that nature is DESIGNED by someone. but not a proof
just a probability
o WEAKNESS OF PALEYS CONCLUSION HUME multiple designers
- committee of Gods conclusion
o REPLY SWINBURNE OCKHAMS RAZOR - one god is a simpler
explanation and so is most probable
o BUT still just probability and not proof
o the world could have been designed by a lesser being - just
because the universe shows signs of being designed, it does
not necessarily mean that the designer must be omnipotent
o The existence of evil in the world suggests that the designer is
somehow limited or flawed which questions characteristics of
God
o The analogy is unsound because nature does not function like
a machine - it may not need a maker and the theory of
evolution suggests it is more similar to some sort of vegetable
and does not have any creator
o The theory is anthropomorphised : Paley explains the world
from the perspective of his human experience but it should
not be explained this way
o The universe could have developed by chance
The Cosmological Argument : Thomas Aquinas
Type of Argument
o a posteriori
o inductive - probabilistic
, The argument - Summa Theologica
o P1 = EVERYTHING IS CONTINGENT - CAN EXIST OR NOT EXIST
’are possible to be and not to be’
o P2 = IF EVERYTHING IS CONTINGENT THEN AT SOME TIME
THERE WAS NOTHING - BECAUSE THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A
TIME BEFORE ANYTHING HAD BEGUN TO EXIST
‘if everything is possible not to be, then at one
time there could have been nothing in existence’
o P3 = IF THERE WAS ONCE NOTHING, THEN NOTHING COULD
HAVE COME FROM NOTHING
o C1 = THEREFORE SOMETHING MUST EXIST NECESSARILY,
OTHERWISE NOTHING WOULD NOW EXIST, WHICH IS FALSE
‘there must exist something the existence of
which is necessary’
o P4 = EVERYTHING NECESSARY MUST BE EITHER CAUSED OR
UNCAUSED
o P5 = BUT THE SERIES OF NECESSARY BEINGS CANNOT BE
INFINITE OR THERE WOULD BE NO EXPLANATION OF THAT
SERIES
o C2 = THEREFORE, THERE MUST BE SOME UNCAUSED BEING
WHICH EXISTS OF ITS OWN NECESSITY
o C3 = BY THIS WE ALL UNDERSTAND GOD
‘this all men speak of as god’
Value for faith
VALUABLE
o Pope John Paul II said faith and reason are mutually supportive
‘faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit
rises to the contemplation of truth’
o Rational and empirically based - appeals to observation
o Consistent with biblical teaching ‘in the beginning God created
the heavens and earth’ Genesis → confirms teaching of a
guiding hand that is directing the whole of nature and human
lives in a purposeful way
