More handpicked essays just for you.
Arguements for the existence of God
A philosophical look at the existence of God
Philosophy essay about god's existence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
There are four major arguments for the existence of God; teleological, cosmological, ontological and morals. None of which do a convincing job of God’s existence. Every argument is going to have a counter, one always being stronger. The most devastating of the arguments is the ontological argument. Taking two things that are based on believing and imagining and putting them together to prove each other’s existence isn’t proving anything. For God to exist he has to be omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. All three of these core qualities have contradictories. An omnipotent God would be able to create an absolutely immovable object, yet be able to move it ( “How to Prove that God Doesn’t Exist”. Comments), so, therefore, it is not absolutely …show more content…
William Paley tried to explain and strengthen this argument with the analogy of the watch. A complex watch is produced by a watch-maker so much that a complex world is created by a world-maker, God (“William Paley, “The Teleological Argument” Philosophy of Religion”). An unknown maker doesn’t mean one doesn’t exist. A complex object must come from a complex creator, so that brings to question who created the complex creator. What is complex? How do we know the world is so complex when we have nothing to compare it to? If an all good God created a world with such order, why is there so much disorder? The world is different in the way that we don’t know how it got here or how we did so a made up God was created to fill that void. This argument doesn’t prove that God exists, but its …show more content…
If nothing were to exist, there is no existent nothing, but nothing cannot be. If there is nothing, then something exists. If nothing exists, then there is something. Nothingness is the absence of existence, so if nothing were to exists, how could a something recall nothing? This is the strongest argument for the existence of God, but there is still a question on whether the uncaused cause is probable. If there is no beginning and no end, how necessary is a necessary being? Necessity depends on how much it is needed, but with the limited knowledge people obtain of the concept of space and time it is impossible to tell whether or not what
The Earth is in that on spot of orbit where it can become warm enough to sustain life for human beings, animals, plants, and just about every living thing on the planet. The fact that the Earth also spins, providing night time for humans and other animals to sleep, or for nocturnal animals to have their own time to hunt or otherwise thrive. The argument all in all states that, everything that exists has a complex nature and design. This complex nature therefore, has a creator that can only explain these patterns and designs. Another part of the argument would be that nothing happens by chance.
Absolutely, if he exists and nothing else exists how can he exists? is he god? does he create the
The intricacy of a simple time telling device has sparked controversy about the creation of the universe. In William Paley’s “The Analogical Teleological Argument” he argues that the universe must have been created by a universe maker, God, due to its complexity. However, David Hume, provides an empiricist objection by arguing that one cannot prove the existence of a universe maker due to lack of experience regarding the creation of a universe. Ultimately, I will argue that Paley’s argument by design is not sufficient for proving God 's existence because, as individuals, we cannot assume that the world works the way we wish it.
Roger White presents an interesting argument for why God must exist. In his argument, White states that everything in the world is finely tuned to live its life accordingly. In order for this to be possible, God must have finely tuned all beings so that they were well fit for life. In depth, this argument is, “If a fact stands in need of an explanation, and a hypothesis explains this fact better than anything else, then they support each other. Our universe being so perfect for life is a fact in need of explanation. The hypothesis that God has finely tuned everything to be where all living beings can exist in this universe is an explanation to this fact. No other hypothesis compares to such a standard as this one. Therefore, the fact that our
An explanation is a set of statements constructed to describe a set of facts which clarifies the causes, contexts, and consequences of those facts. This description may establish rules or laws, and may clarify the existing ones in relation to any objects, or phenomena examined. The first piece Bush Remarks Roil Debate over Teaching of Evolution written by Elizabeth Bumiller, is an explanation. Bumiller addresses her points using facts rather than opinions, she also says, “Recalling his days as Texas governor, Mr. Bush said in the interview, according to a transcript, “I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught.”(2), this signifies that this is an explanation and not an argument since he sees both sides instead of choosing one. For
The reason why the argument fails is because Paley put’s emphasis on giving things a single sole purpose. If things had multiple purposes from Paley’s point of view then it would be a lot more difficult to strike the argument down. This argument also shows the 3 point rule god. Paley has shown in this argument that god is all good, all powerful, and all knowing. The argument also gives a good argument as to how certain things must have intelligent design in order for it to be created. This is where I believe it mostly thrives. If we were to look at another argument like The Ontological Argument it states that the greatest thing that we can conceive exists in the mind, but it is greater to exist in reality than in the mind, but if nothing greater than god can be conceived in the mind then god must exist in reality. This argument can easily be torn apart if someone just believes that god is not the greatest thing that can be conceived. It also does not prove god’s existence throughout the world physically, but with the mind. Where as Paley’s argument shows god through the “creations” he has created and explaining how god is the
One of the most argued topics throughout human history is whether or not God exists. It is argued frequently because there are several different reasonings and sub arguments in this main argument. People who believe God exists argue how God acts and whether there is one or several. People who do not believe God exists argue how the universe became into existence or if it has just always existed. In this paper, I will describe Craig's argument for the existence of God and defend Craig's argument.
without the proof of the fact. But on the other hand, God’s existence can not be. proved in terms of objective arguments and scientific facts. In answer to the question, God’s existence cannot be proved, but neither can his.
The idea of God being the designer of the universe in this theological argument is something that hasn’t been scientifically. proven, therefore science disagrees with the idea. The design argument is split into two parts: design quality and regularity. design for a quality purpose. Design quality argues that the order and regularity evident in the universe is proof of a designer.
The argument from design was an argument thought up by William Paley to prove that God exists. The argument states that if one were to see a rock, they would not think that someone had dropped that rock, whereas if one were to see a watch they would think that it belonged to someone who had dropped it. It then states that the watch is simply to sophisticated and complex that it must have had a manufacturer that made it that way. The argument then goes on to say that many things in nature are also complex and must have been designed by someone to serve a specific purpose. The one who designed these things in nature is God.
In an article by Gienapp (2015), he stated that as the U.S. was being created, the Framers explored various types of government. The first was the Article of the Confederation which had a lot of problems and weaknesses that needed to be fixed, it required a succession of long debates, and it caused a great deal of regional conflict. Because of this, in the hopes that it will solve most of the problems, the Framers in 1787 began drafting the Constitution as well as signed it which replaced the Article of the Confederation. There was a push for ratification of the Constitution by two parties, one supporting it while the other opposed it. What it boiled down to was there was a split by two groups, the Federalist and Anti-Federalist who verbally
William Paley, who wrote The Watch and the Watchmaker, believed that anything organized for a function needed a special explanation. He concluded that these things must have been designed by some sort of designer and hence, the “design” argument was established. Paley used the example of a watchmaker as an analogy exemplifying a designer. “We think it is inevitable that the watch must have had a maker.” (Paley : 57) This specific example is an analogy to the universe and God, which allows us to further question: if the watch had a watchmaker, what kind of maker does nature and humanity have? Is God our creator? Paley also argued that “there existed in things a principle of order”, which made the parts of a watch into their present form and situation. (Paley : 58) He believed his argument was the best available in 1802 and refused to believe in other lesser alternatives because they were incredulous and a mere chance of being the truth.
On the other hand, what caused God? If everything didn’t exist, than what caused God to exist? Nothing created God, He has always existed There can only be one being that can be uncaused. If there were more than one uncaused being, then beings would have potential. They would be striving to be what the other uncaused being is. This counteracts what an uncaused being is. It’s impossible because it would make an uncaused cause no longer be a being that is pure act. The being or beings would potentially be striving to be more than it or the other is.
Paley’s analogy came about from the concept of a stone. He encountered this stone during his walk and wondered how it came about (Paley, 1802, 196). He applies the idea that since a designer must have created this stone, this designer must have created other things just like how a watch is created by a watchmaker. His analogy for a watch and its watch maker becomes his key argument because he argues is that you cannot come to a conclusion that a stone was formed by a natural process, just like how when you look at a watch it has a watchmaker(Paley, 1802, 96). When comparing it back to a stone, Paley says someone must have created it. He says design requires a designer, the works of nature also requires a designer and that designer would be God. From this Paley creates his four arguments for God’s existence from analogies, which are argument from design is based on experience, argument from design assumes that we are different in kind, but same in degree, argument from design argues from mind/ thought to design, and argument from design...
This argument does not convey a whole lot weight these days, on the grounds that in any case; reason is not exactly what it used to be. As should be obvious in the contention, there must be a First Cause which does require any legitimacy or validation. Second, the argument about natural law, no more has anything like the quality that it used to have. The argument that is utilized in the presence of God change their character over the long haul. They were right away hard learned contentions embodying certain very unequivocally false notions. The following statements all the while brings us to the contention from design. We all know the argument from design "everything on the planet is made simply so we can figure out how to live on the planet, and if the world was ever so minimal distinctive, we couldn't figure out how to live in it." Now we achieve one stage further in what I should call the intellectual descent or the moral arguments for the presence of God. At that point there is an alternate exceptional inquisitive type of good contention, which is this: they say that the presence of God is needed with a specific end goal to bring equity into the world. So they say that there must be a God, and there must be Heaven and Hell in place that over the long haul there may be