/
Hume on  t he design argument Hume on  t he design argument

Hume on t he design argument - PowerPoint Presentation

laobeast
laobeast . @laobeast
Follow
344 views
Uploaded On 2020-07-01

Hume on t he design argument - PPT Presentation

Michael Lacewing enquiriesalevelphilosophycouk c Michael Lacewing Life Isnt life amazing Organs serve a purpose heart pump blood eye seeing We understand parts of an organ in relation to serving this purpose ID: 791891

lacewing michael design designer michael lacewing designer design universe parts purpose nature hume

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download The PPT/PDF document "Hume on t he design argument" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Hume on the design argument

Michael Lacewingenquiries@alevelphilosophy.co.uk

(c) Michael Lacewing

Slide2

Life

Isn’t life amazing?Organs serve a purpose – heart – pump blood, eye – seeingWe understand parts of an organ in relation to serving this purpose

A living organism requires huge coordination of tiny parts each functioning well

(c) Michael Lacewing

Slide3

Design

The universe didn’t have to be like this – there could have been no order, no regularityOrder of this kind, the way parts work together for a purpose, can indicate designIf life involves design, by definition, there must be a designer

(c) Michael Lacewing

Slide4

Hume’s version

‘The

intricate fitting of means to ends throughout all nature is just like (though more wonderful than) the fitting of means to ends in things that have been produced by us—products of human designs, thought, wisdom, and

intelligence…

(c) Michael Lacewing

Slide5

Hume’s version

…Since the effects resemble each other, we are led to infer by all the rules of analogy that the causes are also alike, and that the author of nature is somewhat similar to the mind of man, though he has much larger faculties to go with the grandeur of the work he has carried out

.’

(c) Michael Lacewing

Slide6

Hume’s argument from analogy

In the organization of parts for a purpose (the fitting of means to ends), nature resembles the products of human design.Similar effects have similar causes.The cause of the products of human design is an intelligent mind that intended the design.

Therefore, the cause of nature is an intelligent mind that intended the design.

(c) Michael Lacewing

Slide7

Hume’s objections

The analogy between man-made, designed objects and the universe is weak

.

There is a ‘great disproportion’ between

parts of the universe and the whole universe

So we cannot infer that the cause of nature is similar to a human mind.

Thought is a ‘tiny, weak, limited cause’ which moves the bodies of animals – why use it as a model for the whole universe?

(c) Michael Lacewing

Slide8

Hume’s objections to the analogy

The arrangement of parts for a purpose does not, on its own, show that the cause is a designer

We can only make this inference where we have further experience of a designer bringing about such order

We can’t make inferences about causes of single instances, such as the universe

We can only establish what causes what through repeated experience of cause and effect

(c) Michael Lacewing

Slide9

Is the designer the best explanation?

A designer may not be the best explanationE.g. Suppose matter is finite and time is infinite. Then all arrangements of matter will occur, by chance, over timeNeither this explanation nor a designer is clearly better, so we should suspend

judgment

(c) Michael Lacewing

Slide10

Arguing from a unique case

Causation: whenever you have the cause, you get the effect‘Constant conjunction’So you can’t know from a single

instance, what causes what.

Repeated

experience is necessary to infer a causal relation.

The universe is unique. So we cannot infer its cause.We can only infer a designer in cases in which we have repeated experience of something being brought about by a designer

The arrangement of parts for a purpose

on its own

isn’t sufficient

(c) Michael Lacewing