Arguments about God's existence - Essay Example

To most scholars of theology, the explanation about the existence of God raises pertinent issues within any religion. The main reason surrounding this fact is because beings are mortal, and the only connection between the deity and beings is belief an all powerful being exists. Through the cognitive aspect of attitude, the generalities that come with stereotyping are a major influence on the shaping religious ideologies. The presence of a supernatural power which controls the existence of everything on the surface of the earth is developed by the human cognitive attitude that causes a generalization. However, belief is controlled by several factors such as evidence. The existence of evidence in experimentation points out to the fact that a hypothesis can hold a truth value. Therefore, the hypothesis can be a fact or a general truth as depicted by the evidence. The explanation about the existence of God is a subject that has been posited by several theoretical explanations. Some of the arguments and explanations that have been used by scholars to describe the existence of God include the cosmological argument (Taylor, 113), the teleological argument, and the ontological explanations. This paper discuses the teleological perspective that tries to explain the existence of God. it focuses on the arguments explanations and also reviews the criticisms that have been used as a basis of discrediting the argument. In the end, it defends the position taken by this explanation as a valid argument for the existence of God. Discussion The most prominent of facts that sum up the teleological argument about Gods existence is based on intelligent design. According to this school of thought, the existence of human-like intelligence in nature can be a possible explanation of the existence of God (Martin, 126). The argument describes a scenario in which human intelligence drives the reasoning and direction of activities that result in meaningful action. To phenomena that occur for nonhuman events and objects, the direction and precision always come right too. The basic question in these happenings, therefore, is that while humans are guided by the free will to reason from their intelligence, what force pushes these phenomena to act in the same design and precision in nature. The only possible force that is attributed to this fact is the existence of a deity that has the potential to guide all possible events to their precise conclusion all the time (Sennett and Douglas, 153). Ancient theologies like St. Thomas Aquinas devised five ways of telling of the presence of God (Elders, 129). According to this theologian, the explanation of Gods Existence could be given in five ways. First, argument was to do with the fact that there could be an unmoved mover. This perspective mainly gets its strength on the fact nothing in reality is known to have happened or moved without a moving force from a given source. The unmoved mover, in this case, would be the deity that everyone refers to as God. Secondly, first cause perspective of existence points out to the fact that there is no known object that has perfectly caused its existence. Therefore, there must be a substance that is able to cause other things to exist. The existence of the earth and human beings and everything in the world would be attributed to the same deity. The third argument is based on the existence of contingent beings. In this argument, the main notion is that at some point in this world may be nothing existed. The implication in this non-existence is that even up to now still nothing could be existing. However, the presence of a deity that caused the existence of everything is an indication that God does exist. St. Thomas also presented an argument based on the degree of happenings or existence. According to this argument, there have to be different degrees of everything in real existence. For instance, the highest degree of heat could originate from a type of fire. There could be different hot things, but the hottest would emerge from a fire. Similarly, this argument posited the highest degree of goodness or anything that exists within the earth to be God. It is difficult to quantify the highest level of control or goodness since this power cannot be harnessed by a human. Therefore, the most logical of explanations is that this power or source of the same is with God. To sum up all these explanations taken by St. Thomas, the fifth way describes the existence of an overall governing power that points everything to its intelligent conclusion regardless of the human-like intelligence. The unmoved mover theory or the degree explanation all point to the fact that there is an almighty being that drives everything that exists despite pointing at the cosmological explanation (Yandell, 11). Many scholars classify the fifth proof as the most relevant to the teleological explanation of Gods existence (Mallaband, 14), however, the summative view of all these proofs all point to the almighty power that creates and directs all actions. There are criticisms that have been brought up against the teleological argument about God. the most prominent of this arguments was given by David Hume. According to this philosopher, it would be difficult or impractical for anyone to make inference on the existence of a deity not observed in observable phenomena. The relationship between the deity and the intelligent happenings needs to be conspicuous in order for the argument to hold any level of truth (Grcic, 177). The conjoined nature of the two would signal a relationship or a continuation that shows that these events or subjects are related to each other. Without this relationship, it would be difficult to generalize that there is any form of relationship. Furthermore, the critic believes that despite the existence of a considerable amount of orderliness in the universe, there are some parts that still experiences disorder. Proponents of this perspective also believe that the probability of an immaterial being creating anything is null. This notion or view is based on the fact that in real life, there has been no instance of an immaterial being doing anything of this kind. Therefore basing on the mathematical theory of probability (Bird, 89), the proponents of the teleological view are deceived. This school of thought fails to capture the essence of a deity as presented in the teleological argument. Taking the size of the universe as a factor that could prevent the design of the activities and order within its is a myopic view of the same. This perspective can be challenged by the fact that there is no single individual with the capacity to quantify the power of a deity in science (palmer, 141). The degree argument is a possible explanation of this fact. That there could be several powers and degrees of existence at even greater proportions which could be visible to humanity is of no doubt. However, in order to make order and control these great happenings at the degree in which they happen requires an enormous amount of power not envisioned by humanity. The sun, for instance, is one creation that provides energy and controls several events in nature through the universe. The control of power held by this kind of natural existence, therefore, requires a more powerful force than what can be practical to humanity. Therefore the notion that the design and creation of the universe through an immaterial being is not possible is a fallacy. The ability of the immaterial being to control phenomena from a point that humans cannot see is a depiction of the enormous power wielded by the immaterial being over the universe (Shults, 253). Basing a criticism of the teleological argument of Gods existence on Bayes theorem and calculus of probability is also flawed. Within this school of thought, the proponents believe that there is a high chance that a repeat of the same trend whether in creation or the order in nature has the probability of being repeated. This argument points out to the fact that there can be some immaterial beings somewhere who are known to man and have the power to control nature as is so purported by the teleological claims. The flaw, in this case, is that how would someone tell the existence of an immaterial being. Another perspective that is not consistent is the fact that it would be difficult to tell if the actual control emanates from the same immaterial being. The only better argument, therefore, remains the fact that a single all powerful being controls the universe. In conclusion, there are a number of unintelligent creations and existences in nature that still find a way to act towards an end. The ability to work towards an end can be described by scholars as a display of intelligence. The power that controls this ability according to teleological argument points out to the existence of a monotheistic God. Works cited Bird, Graham. A Companion to Kant. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. Print. Elders, Leo. The Philosophical Theology of St. Thomas Aquinas. Leiden: Brill, 1990. Print. Grcic, Joseph. Facing Reality: An Introduction to Philosophy Revised Edition, London, AuthorHouse press, 2009. Print. Mallaband, Philip. As philosophy of religion written for the Edexcel specification. Lulu, 2002. Print Martin, Michael. Atheism: A Philosophical Justification. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990. Print. Palmer, Michael F. the question of God: an introduction and source book. NY. Psychology press, 2001. Print. Sennett, James F, and Douglas R. Groothuis. In Defense of Natural Theology: A Post-Humean Assessment. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2005. Print. Shults, Fount L. R. Reforming the Doctrine of God. Grand Rapids, Mich. [u.a.: Eerdmans, 2005. Print. Taylor, James E. Introducing Apologetics: Cultivating Christian Commitment. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006. Print. Yadell, Keith E. philosophy of religion a contemporary introduction, NY: Routlege, 2002. Print Read More