In this essay I will argue that Cleanthes strongest argument in favour of Natural Religion is his Design Argument. I will do this by explaining the Design Argument and Philo’s strongest responses which I think successfully refute Cleanthes’ claims. I will then critically analyse each view and conclude that although Cleanthes makes some good arguments Philo’s Master Argument successfully undermines the Design Argument.
Cleanthes is an empirical theist who believes we can infer God’s attributes through our empirical observations of the world. This is known as Natural Religion and is an argument based on aposteriori reasoning. It seeks to argue that God can be known through religious epistemology. However, it does not seek to argue for God’s …show more content…
Both of these arguments are used to show how empirical observation is sufficient to infer the characteristics of God. The Voice in the Clouds suggests that if we heard a voice coming from the clouds which was not like any human voice and spoke to each nation in their language then we would not hesitate in attributing it to an intelligent being. In the same sense, the Vegetative Library states that if books grew on trees like fruit we would also not hesitate to deduce it was the work of intelligent design (Hume:pp.63-65). Here Cleanthes creates a reductio ad absurdum argument and uses it to show that the complexity we actually observed in nature is more surprising than these two analogies. The fact that everything in nature works together like the internal structure of a machine shows more complex intelligent design than both of these analogies. Therefore, it is plausible to attribute an intelligent designer to the universe in the same way we would see it plausible to attribute an intelligent designer to the above analogies. If Philo’s reasoning is correct in arguing for bad inference then we would be able to refute the above analogies as the work of an intelligent designer. As this is not the case there has to be a fault in Philo’s reasoning. Therefore, we cannot rule out divine intelligence as the cause of the universe if the claim is based on empirical observation. However, the reductio ad absurdum argument seems to undermine Cleanthes intelligent design in which he unwillingly inserts a God of the gaps answer; inserting God when there could be a more plausible explanation which we have yet to find evidence
Cleanthes is an empirical theist who believes we can infer God’s attributes through our empirical observations of the world. This is known as Natural Religion and is an argument based on aposteriori reasoning. It seeks to argue that God can be known through religious epistemology. However, it does not seek to argue for God’s …show more content…
Both of these arguments are used to show how empirical observation is sufficient to infer the characteristics of God. The Voice in the Clouds suggests that if we heard a voice coming from the clouds which was not like any human voice and spoke to each nation in their language then we would not hesitate in attributing it to an intelligent being. In the same sense, the Vegetative Library states that if books grew on trees like fruit we would also not hesitate to deduce it was the work of intelligent design (Hume:pp.63-65). Here Cleanthes creates a reductio ad absurdum argument and uses it to show that the complexity we actually observed in nature is more surprising than these two analogies. The fact that everything in nature works together like the internal structure of a machine shows more complex intelligent design than both of these analogies. Therefore, it is plausible to attribute an intelligent designer to the universe in the same way we would see it plausible to attribute an intelligent designer to the above analogies. If Philo’s reasoning is correct in arguing for bad inference then we would be able to refute the above analogies as the work of an intelligent designer. As this is not the case there has to be a fault in Philo’s reasoning. Therefore, we cannot rule out divine intelligence as the cause of the universe if the claim is based on empirical observation. However, the reductio ad absurdum argument seems to undermine Cleanthes intelligent design in which he unwillingly inserts a God of the gaps answer; inserting God when there could be a more plausible explanation which we have yet to find evidence