Cases against Teleological Arguments

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
User avatar
Thinking critical
Posts: 1793
Joined: November 7th, 2011, 7:29 pm
Favorite Philosopher: A.C Grayling
Location: Perth, Australia (originally New Zealand)

Re: Cases against Teleological Arguments

Post by Thinking critical »

Belindi wrote: June 18th, 2018, 3:43 am Thinking Critical wrote:
Seeking causes for events is an unescapable consequence of being human, the illogical fallacy of this mind set however is somewhat self evident in that every path we take eventually leads to infinite regress.
I deny that the regress is infinite. The regress ends where causality becomes absolute. Causality become absolute is causeless cause, or cause of itself .

Cause of itself is a name for absolute reality. Our everyday attributions of causes and effects is called common sense. Thinkers are a little closer to reality ; they rely upon science or the arts to steer closer to reality. Maybe mystics, in some sense, know absolute reality.
I agree the problem of infinite regress can end once a causeless cause can be established, however in the scientific framework where the very fabric of reality can be torn apart and understood to degrees so infinitesimally small that we can't even fathom it, the causality principle gets very blurry. When we are speaking of effects of physical things (matter) it's hard to imagine how one thing came to be unless something else had caused it.
In a cognitive framework causal principles aren't restrained by the laws of nature, so yes perhaps at some conscious level of reality the concept of uncaused causes may not be so elusive.
This cocky little cognitive contortionist will straighten you right out
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: Cases against Teleological Arguments

Post by Felix »

Thinking critical: The Uncaused cause tends to be more problematic for theists hence the cosmological argument where they feel it necessary to slot in an agent, then call it god in order to have a complete picture of the Universe which they feel happy with.
Not problematic if God is considered to be the causeless cause, but if not a personal God, most theists will consider it irrelevant. Scientists can be more compulsive than any theist about seeking a complete picture of the Universe with which they can feel intellectually satisfied.
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Cases against Teleological Arguments

Post by Belindi »

Felix wrote:
Not problematic if God is considered to be the causeless cause, but if not a personal God, most theists will consider it irrelevant. Scientists can be more compulsive than any theist about seeking a complete picture of the Universe with which they can feel intellectually satisfied.
But theism rests upon God as causeless cause. Both theism and pantheism rest upon causeless cause. The difference is that while pantheist causeless cause is not concerned with final cause, theist's causeless cause is final cause personified.
User avatar
Thinking critical
Posts: 1793
Joined: November 7th, 2011, 7:29 pm
Favorite Philosopher: A.C Grayling
Location: Perth, Australia (originally New Zealand)

Re: Cases against Teleological Arguments

Post by Thinking critical »

Felix wrote: June 18th, 2018, 7:13 pm
Thinking critical: The Uncaused cause tends to be more problematic for theists hence the cosmological argument where they feel it necessary to slot in an agent, then call it god in order to have a complete picture of the Universe which they feel happy with.
Not problematic if God is considered to be the causeless cause, but if not a personal God, most theists will consider it irrelevant. Scientists can be more compulsive than any theist about seeking a complete picture of the Universe with which they can feel intellectually satisfied.
This is simply a god of the gaps move which proves my point. Before assigning god to the explanation of the uncaused caused, surely it stands to reason that the existence of such a thing must first be established otherwise the "god solution" is nothing more than a ad hoc solution.
If one were to argue that god is necessary to answer the uncaused cause problem then god becomes entangled in a tautological fallacy.
Do scientists feel compelled do understand the origin of the the Universe? Sure, aren't we all? If scientists could understand the origin of the universe would it be intelectually satisfying? Without a doubt.
The difference between the two positions is clear, the scientist/atheist/agnostic excepts the fact that the answers to such questions are unknown yet feel humbled by the fact that humanity has got this far without the urge to create or invent and answer. The theist on the other hand seems to be compelled to assert that since no one has figured out the answer, it must be god by default, this being nothing more than a philosophy of ignorance.
This cocky little cognitive contortionist will straighten you right out
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: Cases against Teleological Arguments

Post by Felix »

Thinking critical: The theist on the other hand seems to be compelled to assert that since no one has figured out the answer, it must be god by default, this being nothing more than a philosophy of ignorance.
Don't lump all theists together, each will have different reasons for believing in a Supreme Being. Their belief may indeed be based on blind faith and/or a subliminal emotional need, but it may also be based on non-intellectual knowledge, i.e., an extra-sensory perception or realization. Mental comprehension alone is not the be all and end all to understanding life.
Before assigning god to the explanation of the uncaused caused, surely it stands to reason that the existence of such a thing must first be established....
Why would you think that Science could establish the existence of an uncaused cause? It can only apprehend material causes and effects, anything operating outside of that arena is incognito.
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
User avatar
Thinking critical
Posts: 1793
Joined: November 7th, 2011, 7:29 pm
Favorite Philosopher: A.C Grayling
Location: Perth, Australia (originally New Zealand)

Re: Cases against Teleological Arguments

Post by Thinking critical »

Felix wrote: June 19th, 2018, 3:18 pm
Thinking critical: The theist on the other hand seems to be compelled to assert that since no one has figured out the answer, it must be god by default, this being nothing more than a philosophy of ignorance.
Don't lump all theists together, each will have different reasons for believing in a Supreme Being.

You are right, I shouldn't have stereotyped, I do apologise.
Why would you think that Science could establish the existence of an uncaused cause? It can only apprehend material causes and effects, anything operating outside of that arena is incognito.
Definitvley it would be very difficuilt to do, i suspect we could only ever demonstrate an uncaused cause in a falsifiable theoretical model and prove it to be true by varifying it's predictions. However even if this were so, due to the nature of the claim the limit of our knowledge an our predispisition to experience reality based on causality principles, I'm sure many people will still remain sceptical of any such findings.
This cocky little cognitive contortionist will straighten you right out
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Cases against Teleological Arguments

Post by Belindi »

How can there not be a unique uncaused cause?
Alias
Posts: 3119
Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett

Re: Cases against Teleological Arguments

Post by Alias »

Belindi wrote: June 23rd, 2018, 5:15 am How can there not be a unique uncaused cause?
I should think the First Cause is unique by definition - or by default.
How it can be is anybody's guess.
Since something/everything clearly is, and since we can only trace causation back a relatively few steps, any causes beyond what we can see or calculate is a matter of speculation. Some people speculate on the basis of the physical world as they have learned of its workings; some base it on their mathematical models; some on mythology and dogma.
It's easier to imagine a causeless cause, back at the beginning of time, than to admit the limits of our vision.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Cases against Teleological Arguments

Post by Belindi »

"Within the limits of our vision." The synthetic a priori , including causality, are among the limits of our vision. Since limited vision is all we have to work with, and since it's imperative that regardless of what we want we each must make decisions then causality is one basis upon which we may make decisions.

Despite that linear causation may be traced back only a few steps, and that causal circumstances may be mapped only a few steps , we can glean the general rule that there is order. We seek out apparent order so that we can predict and we seem to find descriptions of and explanations of orderly systems. Sometimes we get it wrong as did the Cargo Cults. The search for order involves us in an act of faith rather like the search for God involves us in an act of faith, and we cannot escape the search.

Within the limits of some perspectives there is a whole reality and that whole reality is ordered, and may be named the unique causeless cause.

The formal cause(Aristotle) of something is what- it -is -to- be. Thus a finished work of art is what- it -is -to- be. When it's finished it's finished. The intention of the work of art is what-it-is-to-be. The user of the work of art, not the original maker, uses the work of art for a different what-it-is-to-be because the user has a different perspective from the original maker of the work of art. However all perspectives including the maker's perspective make up a whole what-it-is-to-be . This why a good novel ,for instance, can give rise to sequels and prequels. Any of the characters in the novel, any of the events in the novel, might be developed by another creator into another perspective arising from the original story.
The subjective perspective of any subject of experience is in a constant state of change. The formal cause , and the final cause, can be viewed as timeless so that all perspectives are a whole which is both causeless cause from the point of view of eternity, and formal/final cause from the point of view of the perceiving subject that changes with time.

Alias, we cannot know that our vision is limited unless we can first envision causeless cause to compare with the limited, fractured, and piecemeal.
AmosMorrison
Posts: 30
Joined: October 28th, 2021, 8:43 am

Re: Cases against Teleological Arguments

Post by AmosMorrison »

Philosophically inclined thinkers have labored to shape intuition into a more formal, logically rigorous inference. Theistic arguments share a focus on plan, purpose, intention, and design. They are classified as teleological arguments. Loeb has said that “we observe neither God nor other universes and hence no conjunction involving them. There is no observed conjunction to ground an inference either to extended objects or to God, as unobserved causes.”
But these are all philosophical ideas. We observe on a daily basis that God exists. Things that we easily say are science is actually controlled in such a perfect harmony by God Himself. God's works are such that only He can complete them. So be it, but where are the works of God then? The works from which I would infer his existence are not immediately available. Nature's wisdom, goodness, and wisdom in world administration - all of these are visible, perhaps, on the surface of things.
User avatar
revo74
Posts: 12
Joined: February 5th, 2020, 11:13 am

Re: Cases against Teleological Arguments

Post by revo74 »

Mosesquine wrote: March 29th, 2018, 2:05 pm The aim of this post is to provide cases against teleological arguments. The teleological arguments are, by definition, the arguments for theism such that the things in the world are created by purposes (i.e. telos, in Greek), or sometimes called 'design arguments for theism'. I think that the teleological arguments or the design arguments for theism are wrong. First, I am going to show that all teleological arguments have in common to appeal some similarities between complexities and the natures of the world. Second, I am going to provide some cases such that the common points among teleological arguments are harmful and dangerous for our intelligibility.
Teleological arguments are NOT solely theistic arguments. In fact, Aristotle and other Greek philosophers who first introduced them were deists of a certain sort. Teleological arguments can be formulated in various ways. The variations that use the term complexity are the weakest and were not used by the Greeks from my understanding. I myself am a deist of a certain sort. I don't believe in a single deity. Using knowledge and reason I infer that the design is the best explanation via abductive reasoning.
There is no formal deductive or inductive argument that can be made for any claim regarding the origin of the universe.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021