Philosophy

Philosophy Study Guide

William Paley: The design argument was further developed and refined by William Paley, who asserts that the high level of order in the world is proof of an intelligent designer, God. Paley uses the analogy of a watch in his argument to argue that the universe must have a creator. In his argument, he states that he found a watch on the ground and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place. He examines the watch and perceives that the different parts are framed together for a purpose. In conclusion, the mechanism being observed which requires examination of the instrument and perhaps some previous knowledge of the subject to perceive it and understand it; that there must have existed at some time and at some place that the watch had a maker who formed it for the purpose which we find it actually to answer who comprehended its construction and designed its use. Some thinkers have raised objections to the design argument such as they cannot accept the fact that there is a certain order in the universe without concluding that this order is the result of intellectual design and the other is that perhaps we simply evolved randomly or that the universe if governed by certain impersonal principles that are expressed in the orderliness of the universe that we perceive. Some thinkers have argued that the universe is poorly designed with many elements that do not work as well as they could if an intelligent designer had created them. The Argument of Morality: The beginning point is the deeply ingrained sense of morality that humans possess and its conclusion is that this moral sense must be derived from a supremely moral mind, namely God. Natural law ethicists see a broad agreement among the major ethical systems of the world and others point to the conscience, the powerful, deeply ingrained conviction that we have the capacity to choose what is right and good over what is wrong and bad. Both schools of thought point to God as the source of these teachings or feelings. Immanuel Kant believed that morality is grounded mainly in our ability to reason, hence his supreme moral principle “Act only on the principle that you can at the same time will it to be a universal law of nature.” Kant believed that our ability to reason gives us the ability to clearly recognize the highest good a concept that integrates the balanced harmony of moral goodness and personal happiness. We have the absolute conviction that people who live virtuous, morally upright lives should be rewarded with happiness; whereas those who lead evil, immoral lives should endure misery and suffering but have seen that this balance harmony on Earth does not often exist. For Kant, our ability to reason demands that this seemingly unfair state of affairs be corrected and this can only occur in an afterlife in which virtue will be rewarded and evil punished. Such a future life of rational justice can only be created by a supreme being: God. Kant explains his view in more detail in Critique of Practical Reason , in which he states that because we are able to contemplate the highest good for humans in a clear and compelling way, we must assume the existence of those things that make such as highest good possible. Kant argues that the highest good entails the idea of people being happy in direct proportion to moral goodness and because a direct correlation between happiness and moral goodness does not occur in this life, reason demands that we assume that this correlation will occur in the next life and this means assuming the existence of God. 3.8 The Problem of Evil The existence of evil in the world poses a serious threat to religion in general and to the concept of an all-loving, all-powerful God. There are two categories of evil in the world: ● Natural evil: The human calamities that are a result of natural disasters (earthquakes,

©2018

Achieve

Page 35

of 126