Teleological is the concept of making an argumentative design to prove the existence of God. The teleological design is demonstrated as a proof based design that discusses the existence of God. The earlier studies developed a mindset that the earth is created by some supreme power. As per the opinion of Plato, the world is just the reflection of the original world imagined by God. The arguments regarding the cosmology start with the design of predetermination. This study predetermines god to be the creator of the universe and cosmology. On the contrary, the teleological design is an argument based design that comes to a conclusion with logical arguments and counter-arguments. The teleological concept finds and identifies various sources of knowledge and design arguments on the factor. Thus, the teleological concept has a multi-dimensional design that establishes the opinion with continual arguments. Hume has explored the teleological concept as widely based and focuses on creating arguments over the existence of God. This study will be conceptualized on the context of God’s existence and design of arguments through the teleological form. The Humean objections will be analyzed to structure the study properly. Apart from that, the analogical design, deductive design and abductive design will be analyzed in this study. The alternative explanation will be explained through Darwinian Theory. The cosmological concept on the existence of God will be analyzed followed by design thinking. The concluding part of the study will summarize the whole discussion and will outline the researcher’s opinion.
Design interference of teleological design over the existence of god
The ancient arguments were developed with a predetermined idea of the existence of one single designer, god. This theory was widely populated in Greece during the 18th century. Earlier, Hume stated that the whole universe belongs to a single machine that is divided multi-dimensional particles. All the particles spread around the world. However, the particles are adjoined with its creator; God. The creator god created everyone with thought, wisdom and intelligence. Thus, all the humane resemble each other. However, this opinion of Hume was not developed structural arguments. Moreover, this concept is not suitable to be answered logically. Hence, the logical arguments can be divided into three parts; analogical design argument, deductive design arguments and adductive design arguments to skillfully establish the existence of God. .
The analogical arguments have different parallels like natural; entities and human art-crafts. These two are taken to come in a certain conclusion over the operative causation. This design can be analyzed through Humean objections.
The traditional theories of design were greatly criticized by Hume. Hume stated that the analogical design is not suitable to come into any certain conclusion over the existence of God. An advocacy of the design can be traced by segregating the human art-crafts and cosmos art-crafts. However, similarities are also found between the human art-crafts and cosmos machine another context of a living organism. Hume has also argued that the alternative design can also be perceived through the natural entities like chances, possibilities and saturation of the relevant states. Hence, the resemblance between the human art-crafts and cosmos machine stays on the concept of possibilities and probabilities. Thus, Hume has stated that any probabilistic cognition can take the arguer to the concept of the existence of God.
The arguments of Hume deliver the probabilistic cognition. This state’s two outcomes; Firstly, any two particles can be similar to some extent. However, they can also have dissimilarities. This defines the art-crafts and the natural design cannot be only similar or only different from each other. Additionally, the similarities depend on the transportation of design attribution. Moreover, the transportation is interconnected with the relevancy between these two designs. Secondly, the alternative way of producing Rs is an empirical matter that cannot be settled without complex stipulation. Hume’s own way of developing the argument design suggests his analogical approach. Both the ways suggest the concrete existence of a supreme designer of the universe; God.
The deductive argument requires a deeper intuition. The deeper intuitions collect shreds of evidence to establish the design. The appropriateness of the RS questions depends on the empirical design of the cognitive agent. This also depends on probabilities. It depends on mind that can generate the force to reestablish the consistency in design. The conventional designs are not related to the deductive design. This testimony of mind designs the RS observable arguments. The testimony must have an interconnection with the analogical concept of design. Previously, Hume told that human art-crafts are not as beautiful as a machine created by God. People who acknowledge the intricate nature of the cosmos can admit openly that nature can bind the design and intentional shape at a time. This perception of Hume has developed with mind suggestive principles that intentionally shape the characteristics of the questions.
It is also notable from the arguments that several natural particles are intentionally designed by the supervision of one single designer; God. Thus, the arguments are developed with the characteristics and the intentional design of nature where the human art-crafts are least valuable and the art-crafts of God are more valuable. This suggests the deduction of the human art-crafts. As per the opinion of Paly, properties of evincing designs are destroyed by the potential objections. However, the opinion of Paly was specially mentioned to concede the conclusion that if there is a design, there must be a designer. The designer is the symbol of God. Paly used the term interference to refer the God.
Adductive interference is considered to be the best explanation of the scientific causes. The candidates are conceptualized to explain the significant respects. This includes explanatory power, adequate information, plausibility, intelligence and evidence support which is considered to be the qualities of God. Evidence must be given to each of the design. The design arguments turn into design explanation by effective implementation of interferences. The interferences explain the data that are gathered through conventional knowledge and beliefs. Something in nature has consisted with an extreme level of complexity to adjust the ends. Here also the intentional design is considered to be the best design for the explanation of interference. The creator of the intentional design is depicted as the supreme designer or God. The existence of God has been analyzed with the arguments of Darwin, Paly, agent explanation, mechanical explanations and disputes of explanation.
The alternative explanation is fueled by Darwin that includes undersigned, unplanned, unshaped and undeveloped arguments of natural selections. As per the theory of Darwin, natural selection is the most perceivable selection that can explain the shreds of evidence through various adaptations. It is an interventional process that is accountable to describe the naturalistic explanations. The explanation of Paly was totally demolished by Darwin his explanation of natural selection. Thus, the beautiful hinge can be considered to be made by some more intelligent being which can be referred to as the God. The design of variability lacks inorganic beings and more prominently these are selected by nature. Richard Dawkins had also strengthened the opinions of Darwin’s theory of natural selection stating that origin and the development of the biological adaptation are designed by the biological realm. The idea of natural selection is considered to be dominant to establish the responses to make design arguments. On the contrary, the beauty of the natural hinges strengthens the concept of the existence of God.
The agent explanation is a three-dimensional concept that depicts the intention, interventions and essential components of explanation. In some cases, specific agent explanations can try to make a more sensible appeal to each of the questions. On the other hand, pushing the agent may not be workable. Yet, there is the availability of the change of levels through agent explanations. The agent explanations perceive the opinion of the existence of God.
The mechanical explanations define the explanatory factors that are less workable or full of mechanisms. This is a sceptic argument over the existence of God. There is the unavailability of the intentional explanation in this concept. The mechanical relocation is stated to be the toughest relocation where there is least possible to see the mechanical process to relocate. The progression of level shifting continues through a lengthy process in order to avoid broader difficulties; for example- the conversion of physics into quantum mechanics. There are several hidden variable theories that can be managed to attempt to authenticate the success or failure of the arguments rejecting the existence of supreme designer.
The assessments of likelihood and plausibility can be explained to define the significance of beliefs, commitments and dispositions. The conceptual commitments are tilted by the prior commitments. This shows a potential downfall of the necessary designs. The disagreements and divergence are analyzed philosophically so that it can indicate a strong prior commitment. The conceptual principles are acceptable to some level. However, it can disagree to some other level defining the relevant phenomenon. The design arguments reject the claims of design, teleology, agency and Darwinian concept and acknowledge the existence of God.
The design is considered to be an indirect intelligent controller that controls the causation and shreds of evidence. For example- God could have initiated any specific process to create different kinds of agents according to his intention. If this happens, no additional agents would be required to produce the intervention process. It is arguable that God initiates the divine actions not by immediate activities but by developing the concept without harming the changing course of nature. The influence of RS questions in mind, eases the production process. Moreover, the production process is developed with a minimal requirement of shreds of evidence.
As per the explanation of physics, the universe was expanded by a constant process of cosmological turnarounds. Any change of order would not produce energy and it would be considered as a systematic breakdown of the cosmological concept. The big bang theory was also conceptualized under the expansion of a cosmological the concept that depicts the universal collapse and creation of life on earth.
The cosmological concept also shows the sustainability in the equilibrium of natural objects that are maintained by a supreme designer or God. The force of life continues with the ever increasing sustainability of oxygen and carbon dioxide. Without the equilibrium of the oxygen and carbon dioxide, life would not have created. Thus, the cosmological concept strengthens the existence of God.
Conclusion
The study is developed with the teleological concept of the God’s existence. The existence of god has been conceptualized through different arguments and designs. The designs and arguments are the key criterion for teleological arguments. Theory of Hume, the theory of Darwin and the theory of Paly have been analyzed in the study to construct a strong evidence of the existence of god. Later, the cosmological concepts of arguments have been discussed to develop the concept. Hence, the arguments have made it quite clear there is a strong existence of a supreme designer of the cosmos God. It can be stated that there is an intelligent designer whose craftsmanship reflects in the creation of the universe.
References
Besnard, Philippe, and Anthony Hunter. “Constructing Argument Graphs With Deductive Arguments: A Tutorial”. Argument & Computation 5, no. 1 (2014): 5-30.
Dumsday, Travis. “A Cosmological Argument From Moderate Realism”. The Heythrop Journal(2014): n/a-n/a.
Garrett, Don. “Millican’S “Abstract,” “Imaginative,” “Reasonable,” And “Sensible” Questions About Hume’S Theory Of Cognition”. Hume Studies 40, no. 2 (2014): 227-242.
Gleason, Jesse. “An Interpretive Argument For Blended Course Design”. Foreign Language Annals 46, no. 4 (2013): 588-609.
Halstrøm, Per Liljenberg. “Rhetorical Tools For Discovery And Amplification Of Design Arguments”. Design Issues 33, no. 1 (2017): 3-16.
Himma, Kenneth Einar. “Design Arguments For The Existence Of God”. SSRN Electronic Journal (2015).
Kawauchi, Akio. “On 4-Dimensional Universe For Every 3-Dimensional Manifold”. Topology and its Applications 196 (2015): 575-593.
Khatchadourian, Haig. “The New Design Argument And God”. WISDOM 1, no. 6 (2016): 46.
Nelson, Craig M. “Teleology And Structural Directedness”. The Heythrop Journal (2018).
Rooney, James Dominic. “Evolutionary Biology And Classical Teleological Arguments For God’s Existence”. The Heythrop Journal 54, no. 4 (2013): 617-630.
Gibney, Elizabeth. “Model Universe Recreates Evolution Of The Cosmos”. Nature (2014).
ojalehto, bethany, Sandra R. Waxman, and Douglas L. Medin. “Teleological Reasoning About Nature: Intentional Design Or Relational Perspectives?”. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 17, no. 4 (2013): 166-171.
Pievani, Telmo. “Intelligent Design And The Appeal Of Teleology. Structure And Diagnosis Of A Pseudoscientific Doctrine”. PARADIGMI, no. 1 (2013): 151-164.
Pyysiäinen, Ilkka. “THEISM RECONSIDERED: BELIEF IN GOD AND THE EXISTENCE OF GOD”. Zygon® 50, no. 1 (2015): 138-150.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download