"If only God would give me some clear sign! Like making a large deposit in my name in a Swiss bank."Woody Allen (1935 -present)
Perhaps one of Christianity's most famous depictions, Michelangelo's Genesis, has some philosophical intent?Notice the fingers between God and Adam. Though close, they aren't touching.
Is God destined to be just out of reach?
.
Or is it the opposite?
Believing in God has been another philosophical hurdle for people in various cultures throughout history. Take a moment to play this game. Given its philosophical (not religious) perspective, you might be surprised by the results! Click here to go to the Battle Ground God game.
Arguments for God's Existence
In the last activity you leaned about two key arguments for God's existence, namely Cosmological and Ontological. In this activity, you will examine the remaining two:
| Argument | Philosopher(s) |
|---|---|
| Cosmological | Plato and Aristotle |
| Ontological | St. Anselm |
| Teleological | Thomas Aquinas |
| Mind-Body | Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz |
3. Teleological
Can you conceive of God as a watchmaker?
If you can, then you already understand the essence of the teleological argument. That is, imagine this scenario:
You are walking in a pristine forest when suddenly you come across an elegant pocket watch. Given its detail and intricacy, would you ever doubt that someone made it?The Watchmaker argument follows the same reasoning:
the universe is so complex that it requires a 'maker' in order to make sense of its own existence. In other words, there is no way that the universe could have been created by chance and not design.
Or is it the opposite?
Believing in God has been another philosophical hurdle for people in
| Thomas Aquinas explained the idea in his Summa Theologica: "The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack knowledge, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that they achieve their end, not fortuitously, but designedly. Now whatever lacks knowledge cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is directed by the archer. Therefore, some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God."(The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas Second and Revised Edition, 1920) |
Scientific View
The teleological argument also receives some scientific support. Systematically, scientists have found that the universe is more complex than they initial hypothesized. Whether this complexity comes from dark energy or singularities, the fact remains that no scientific theory yet has an explanation for how the universe came into existence. In fact, due to the way the universe formed, no matter how powerful our telescopes become, humans will never be able to peer into the universe's first moments. Indeed, even Einstein argued for God's existence.
 A star's inner shell | Likewise, you yourself are a part of the universe - star stuff. That is, the atoms in your body were created (could only be created) and released upon the supernova exposition of dying stars. In a very literal sense, these explosions seeded the universe with the atoms necessary for life to develop and planets to form. In other words, every part of your body originated in a star. Talk about recycling! |
Anthropic Principle
 A six-story card castle made from playing cards | Almost daily you hear how fragile our world's environment is. But have you ever wondered about the universe's stability? The anthropic principle argues that humanity's existence is so unlikely, that our being here suggests a creator. Like a deck of cards, if one single piece is removed or changed, the entire structure falls to pieces. For example, conditions for something as fundamental as the atom depend on a balance of forces to within one in 1018. And without atoms, no physical matter could exist. |
Counterarguments
Q. As a critical thinker, can you spot any problems with Aquinas and/or others' arguments stated above in explaining the existence of God?
A. After pondering the question, click here for some examples that help answer the question.
4. Mind-Body Problem
 Descartes' illustration of the mind body problem | As you learned previously, philosophers disagree as to how and whether the mind and body interact. After all, when you think about it, how can they (unless you believed in idealism or materialism) since the images you "see" are mere representations decoded and sent electrically from your eyes to your brain? And what about insects and animals perceiving the same thing differently? Since this perceptual filter always exists, how is it ever possible to REALLY know something for certain? |
Well, one answer is God. Basically, God acts as a conduit through which the mind and body can interact... the invisible glue that bonds them together. Since the mind and body seem to exist, it only makes sense (within this argument) that something must be causing the two to interact. This argument is extensively explored by Leibniz in his "Monadology" as highlighted in the previous Activity - Is There a God Part 1.
Another variation came from Spinoza, who argued that everything is God (he called it Substance), and so there is no mind-body problem since they are both aspects of the same thing. This, in turn, means that everything from you to the glaciers are simply aspects (or attributes) of God.
Counterarguments
Q. As a critical thinker, can you spot any problems with Leibniz and Spinoza's arguments in explaining the existence of God?
A. After pondering the question, click here for some examples that help answer the question.
No comments:
Post a Comment