1 Explore the importance of inductive reasoning for the success of the design argument. (8)
1 Explore ideas about inductive reasoning in the design argument for the existence of God. (8)
1 Explore different ideas about inductive reasoning in the design argument for the existence of God. (8)
1 Explore the characteristics of a posteriori and a priori arguments. (8) 2019 AS Paper Q
1 Explore the key features of the design argument. (8)
1 Explore the role of order and regularity in the design argument for G-d’s existence. (8)
1 Explore ideas about analogy in the design argument for the existence of God. (8) Sams 2016
1 Explore the key features of the argument for design based on analogy. (8)
1 Explore Paley’s contribution to the design argument. (8)
1 Explore the key ideas of William Paley in relation to the design argument for the existence of God (8)
1 Explore the cumulative effect of evidence in the design argument. (8)
1 Explore how the design argument has been challenged. (8)
1 Explore the anthropic principle as evidence of a designer. (8)
1 Explore different ideas about the Anthropic Principle in the design argument for the existence of God. (8)
1 Explore the regularities of co-presence and regularities of succession in the design argument for Gods existence. (8)
1 Explore the weakness of probability rather than proof in the design argument. (8)
1 Explore evolution and deism as alternative interpretations to the design arguement. (8)
1 Explore the weaknesses of the design argument for G-d’s existence. (8)
1 Explore two strengths of the Design Argument. (8) 2020 AS Q
1 Explore the key challenges to the design argument for the existence of God. (8)
1 Assess the weaknesses of the design argument for the existence of God. (8)
1 Explore two strengths of the Design Argument. (8) 2020AS
1 Explore why Hume rejected the design argument as proof of the existence of God . (8)
Hume was effectively an atheist, stating that it was ‘just barely possible that God exists’. Therefore he was unlikely to accept any arguments for theism. Christian versions of the design argument were all intent on proving the existence of an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God. As an empiricist, Hume challenged this with reference to the existence of evil. Natural disasters such as the 1755 Lisbon earthquake and other terrible suffering in the natural world suggested to Hume that any designer deity was at best incompetent and at worst downright malevolent.
Hume accused all versions of the design argument of committing the fallacy of composition. Even if the parts making up the universe bore evidence of design, there were no grounds for arguing that this was true of the universe as a whole. Hume also claimed that the limited knowledge possessed by humans meant that they could have no understanding of what it would take to design a universe. Any attempts to argue for a divine designer were therefore doomed from the start.
Building on this, he claimed that the apparent order and design in the universe is ‘mind-imposed’, i.e. human interpretation of what is observed. Adopting the Epicurean hypothesis, he stated that the universe is as it is through chance. It could be that there are cycles of order followed by chaos, and we just happen to be in a period of order.
Hume also criticised them for using inappropriate analogies. Based on his observation of the universe, he viewed it as a living entity so a more appropriate analogy would be living, e.g. a vegetable. This would suggest a natural rather than a supernatural explanation. Mechanistic analogies were, he thought, deliberately chosen because they led naturally to the explanation of design
Furthermore, a vegetable analogy and the principle of like causes behind their effects suggested to Hume that any designer must be similar to the design. Hume suggested therefore that if there was a designer, it could be a multiplicity of mortal deities, male and female and not the deity of monotheism.