Critique of the Design Argument by David Hume - Book Report/Review Example

Examine Hume's criticism of the Argument From Design. Are his objections decisive essay needs to show good knowledge and understanding of the issues.Substantial evidence of independent thought and judgment, with arguments which are clearly presented and well structured. That the universe is designed by an 'intelligent creator' as it exhibits equilibrium and order has prevailed for many centuries as the most robust argument in defense of theism in the philosophical realm of old. This is also referred to as the classic Design Argument. This argument, however, was dismantled when David Hume presented his criticism of the Argument of Design. Hume's propositions against the design contentions have sparked further heated debates on the subject of god's existence for many centuries (Gaskin 1993). Until now, Hume's arguments persist and many still attempt to dispute his assertions which can be considered acute and decisive as until recently, no one has put forward a more vigorous dispute to contest the claim. In his treatise "Critique of the Design Argument", presented in his book Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, David Hume introduced a discourse between two characters, Cleanthes and Philo. Cleanthes brings Philo's attention to the world around them stating that the world is but one great machine, with its tiniest parts attuned to each other and with accuracy worthy of admiration and contemplation (Gaskin 1993). Cleanthes further adds that the creator, although of 'larger faculties', is analogous to the minds of men which the 'designer' created as they possess wisdom and intelligence (Swinburne 1991) This argument, Cleanthes believes, 'proves the existence of a Deity'. Philo responds using the house and the universe as analogy and asserts that the universe does not manifest relationship to a house, as this analogy is imperfect, and there are many difficulties and mysteries which we fail to clarify in the works of nature. Furthermore, Philo contends that men's capability to understand 'infinite' relations is inadequate and it is "impossible for us to tell, from our limited views, whether this system contains any great faults" and deserves any justifiable adulation when "compared to other possible, and even real systems." Through Philo's character, Hume asserts that order and purpose are perceived and understood only when they are the consequences of design. However, we see order all the time manifested in seemingly unconscious occurrences like vegetation and generation. Thus, design constitutes only a tiny fragment of our perception with regard 'purpose' and order. Assuming that the design argument is feasible, Hume argues, it is still not enough to surmise or prove the existence of a deity judging from the conclusions gleaned from our knowledge of the universe's configuration which bears a distant resemblance to human design - cursory and sometimes unintelligent - a world which Hume states is "the only the first rude essay of some infant deity, who afterwards abandoned it, ashamed of his lame performance. . . " (Hume 1739). Furthermore, Hume believes that god's intellectual or mental order and faculties need to be elucidated in order for the design assertions to reach a rational conclusion. Otherwise, we could not create a parallel explanation of order, or actually define it, leaving the notion unexplained and unclear. Hume also argued that if an orderly and balanced natural world necessitates a special maker or designer, then God's mind as it is well ordered, likewise requires a creator. Thus, this maker would similarly need another maker, and so on (Hume 1739). In addition to the aforementioned ideas, Hume's arguments also brought about the notion of natural selection and teleology based on the argument: 1'Often, what appears to be purpose, where it looks like object X has feature F in order to secure some outcome O, is better explained by a filtering process: that is, object X wouldn't be around did it not possess feature F, and outcome O is only interesting to us as a human projection of goals onto nature.' This argument from Hume's treatise is said to have paved the way for the foundation of the Theory of Evolution first proposed by Charles Darwin. The theory states that members of each species have varying trait that are sometimes advantageous - allowing individual member of species to better survive or adapt to her environment. These individuals may reproduce offspring which has a better chance of survival. The theory, a parallel of the Hume's assertion as aforementioned, also states that descendants of a forebear will differ and will result to a new species. Let us now consider Hume's refutation through his character Philo and Cleanthes by going back to their arguments. Hume asserted that the comparison about nature and the various things found in it, is not effective as things present in the universe are unlike human material items which exhibits considerable disparity. This is where most proponents of the design argument fail to substantiate their claim as they generally compare the universe and human machines as if an analogy exists between the two. Still, Hume was able to identify significant points within the arguments. Firstly, any two items which have numerous aspects in common are also disparate in many ways. The argument therefore should only be applied and served well depending on whether they are closely linked to design. Another argument that needs to be discussed is the argument with regards teleological thinking which until now has faced resistance from modern biology. The question we need to ask is whether or not specific biological occurrences are designed. The focus must now become whether or not the laws and conditions necessary for the indirect production of life, intelligent life, etc., could themselves be free of intention, design and mind at some point. In recent years, that query has been brought forward by members of the scientific community. Hume's rationale in disparaging the argument from design endows believer of theism with a difficult problem with regards their idea of god. On the contrary, Cleanthes insists that the parallel which exists between this world and human products is not very insignificant and God somehow resembles human intelligence. For some scholars, this leads to a degradation of the creator. In addition, Hume also seems to suggest that we know nothing about the nature or the attributes of God and that everything about God is unknown. This is one of Hume's techniques in order to pit a group of theists against another. It is clear therefore that Hume's criticism and objections of the argument from design is profound and radical. Numerous parts of the critique also suggests that Hume sometimes reverses position and in some ways concedes to some of Cleanthes arguments. This is apparent at the passage at the beginning of Part XII in which Philo stated that no one is that credulous so as to reject the prevailing view that signs of intention and design exists in this world. Cleanthes also argues that 'the works of nature bear a great analogy to the work of art (Sober 2003' suggesting the existence of an intelligent artist or an architect. However, Philo once again states something on the contrary and insists on the trivial nature of the whole discourse and arguments as to call God a 'mind' or 'intelligence' and stressed the disparity between him and the human mind. Atheists may contend that there is a distant analogy around the diverse operations of nature. These comparisons do not suggest that the basis of the emergence of the universe is the mind or human intelligence. The main idea that can be extracted from this is that, such analogies are so feeble and distant and that God's nature cannot be explained nor understood (Poidevin 1996). For a many decades, Hume's arguments have been challenged using modified arguments from the intelligent design proposition. Scholars in the field of religion and philosophy have concocted innovative assertions and extensions borne out of the design proposition. Many of these counter-arguments on Hume's theory have seen their contentions fall apart as the arguments proposed by Hume still stands strong amidst attacks from different schools of philosophical thought. One of the reasons Hume arguments survive and persist up till this day is that, his objections on the notion that an orderly universe exists, is strengthened and supported by science. Although knowledge of the universe during his time is not as progressive as compared to today's knowledge, Hume exhibited deeper understanding of the universe we live in. Our findings in astronomy, for example, points to a more chaotic universe rather than an orderly one. Astronomers contend that the universe used to be crowded and chaotic; stars were more massive as they die rapidly and detonate after millions of years. These explosions result to newer and heavier elements, leading to the spawning of new stars, less massive, but multiplying, amidst chaos, like crazy. Stephen Hawking, in his book "A Brief History of Time", explicates his conjecture that the universe is congested and limited in extent, with no beginning or end. However, many of us assume that the orbits of stars and planetary bodies take a defined movement which have been 'properly spaced' so as moving matters in space may glide in 'safety.' Conversely, for many billions of years, planetary objects have been traveling in changing paths and orbits consequently collided and crashed onto each other. The order that we perceive now as we gaze at the stars is just a result of planetary bodies that did not have blockade of bodies on their paths. In addition, these orbits were random, as scientists assert that the elliptical course is the most dangerous of all paths. The aberration in shape, path or movement is what cause most collisions in the universe. If design were intelligent, as applied in the 'creation' of the universe, a circular orbit is safer for a celestial body to move across space. "If all the orbits were nearly circular," according to Rolling T. Chamberlain, ["The Origin and Early Stages of the Earth," in The Nature of the World and of Man, p. 37.] only a few of the separate bodies moving in them would come into collision with one another" but because the orbits take an elliptical shape, conflicting much in contour and dimensions, numerous of these particles have a high prospect of colliding against each other. Furthermore, stars do not just return to their original position in space dues to the unending movements of heavenly bodies as the stars and other matter in space disperse itself into interstellar space. This results to the thinning out of the universe in which stable orbits do not subsist. The chaotic universe likewise manifests itself in our existence. We live in a world where unpredictability is the prevailing law and humans must adapt to this situation. The environment we live in for instance, exhibits unpredictable patterns as it is continually barraged and assaulted by disasters and natural occurrences which in turn results to the remaking of the earth's terrain. We, as humans, adapted to these changing surroundings, as consequently our traits, behavior, culture; physical appearances are continually shaped and reshaped by our environment and surroundings. Finally Hume's decisive and astute arguments can be summarized and evaluated according to his stated proposition. First, the analogy between the universe and human produced items fail to persuade. Hume does not surmise that the universe has a semblance on complex human made machines as artifacts are designed for a purpose. On the contrary, the universe has an unclear function (Poidevin 1996). While regular laws may seem to suggest that there is a necessary connection, it is difficult to surmise the apparent function of the universe. The famous biologist J.B.S. Haldane once replied to a reporter who queried what his research on genetics suggested about the Deity. Haldane replied that "He must have an inordinate fondness for beetles," referring to the numerous species of these insects existing for no perceptible function other than for the purpose of reproduction. Secondly, for Hume, intelligence is only a single unit of the dynamic causation in the universe. Various normal phenomena apparently do not call for intelligence to happen. The ocean tides, for instance, would barely make a fine option, since their justification in terms of simple gravitational relations does not necessitate any intelligent design. In addition, even if intelligence exists everywhere, it is not logical to ascribe it to the emergence of the universe. This is scientifically proven and can be illustrated in the modern times in which our technology is capable. The origin of the universe, as mentioned was a unique phenomenon which occurred by chance and thus making an analogy to it is futile. This is an excellent point to consider as we have a plethora of endemic objects, organisms and human artifacts but we only have a single universe. Science can provide us with more effective analogies by comparing objects or entities and their populations. As it is apparently easy to compare things found in our world, we have nothing to compare our universe to as it is the only one we know that infinitely exists. It is illogical to compare whole to a part of a whole and the other way around. We may perceive a God present in the universe at all times, but this comparison does not provide scientific value. It is remote that theology and other social sciences can actually benefit from this analogy. Moreover, the analogy between the minds of humans and the mind of the Supreme Being is apparently 'anthropomorphic.' Nature in general is mindless rather than 'intelligent.' It is credulous to interpret the mind of God using the human mind as a comparison. Lastly, the product of anthropomorphic philosophy would always result to a close scrutiny of a finite god. Hume showed through his propositions, that if the argument from design is seriously considered, most of us will come to the conclusion that the god who controls the universe is very disparate and divergent from the concept of the Christian god. As there are also no independent arguments on how all- knowing and perfect the designer is, we have to assume its capability and attributes manifested in the universe he designed and created. And to quote the greatest British thinker of the previous century, Bertrand Russell, 'If I had millions of years of time and infinite power and had come up with the universe as we know it, I should be ashamed of myself." WORKS CITED Chamberlain, Rolling T. (2001) "The Origin and Early Stages of the Earth," in The Nature of the World and of Man, p. 37. Gaskin,J.A.C. (1779). Dialogues concerning Natural Religion in: Dialogues and Natural History of Religion, ed. (Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press, 1993). Page references are to this edition. Hawking, Stephen (1988). A Brief History of Time. Bantam Books. ISBN 0-553-38016-8. Hume, D. (1739-40) A Treatise of Human Nature: being An Attempt to introduce the experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects in two volumes Norton, D. F. (1993). Introduction to Hume's thought. In Norton, D. F. (ed.), (1993). The Cambridge Companion to Hume, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-32 Poidevin, Robin Le. (1996). Arguing for Atheism, (New York: Routledge,), p. 85. Sober, Elliot, 2003. "The Design Argument" p. 27-54 in (Manson 2003). Swinburne, Richard, 1991. The Existence of God (NY: Clarendon) Read More