Humes Dialogues - Essay Example

Hume’s Dialogues In Hume’s dialogues, Cleanthes explains the existence of God by using cause and effect experience. He suggests that just as human beings are able to design certain things such as cars, clothes, buildings, etc; so did God create the universe. In this case, Cleanthes argues that because human beings are able to design such structures and objects, there should also be a supreme being – whom he called God, who created the universe in a similar way as human beings design objects. According to him, this shows that God who is the creator of the earth is similar to human beings. He asserts that fitting of means to ends throughout nature is similar to the manner in which human beings fit means to ends of things through human design, thought, intelligence and wisdom. Using the rule of analogy, Cleanthes explains that because the effects are similar, so are the causes. Cleanthes therefore says, “The author of nature is somewhat similar to the mind of man, though he has much higher faculties to go with the grandeur of the work he has carried out” (Hume, p.g.10). This argument leads Cleanthes to conclude that God exists and that he resembles human mind and intelligence. To illustrate God’s existence further, Cleanthes uses the analogy of the order, proportion and arrangement of every part of a human being and the universe. He argues that things on earth are fitted to serve their purpose. For instance, staircases are designed in such a way that human legs can climb them. In this case, the steps are designed to serve their purpose – to enable human beings to climb them using their legs. This inference, according to Cleanthes, is infallible. However, he admits that the use of legs to serve their climbing purpose is not certain because of the dissimilarities that exist in world. Finally, he reiterates that these similarities do not mean that the analogy is a presumption or a conjecture as suggested by Philo. The similarity of God and Man as explained by Cleanthes is an argument a posteriori which is demonstrated by the suitability, order and arrangement of things to suit specific purposes. For instance, the order and arrangement of a cloth is due to the actions of a designer. Matter has a cause or a source of order just as the mind of a human being cause the order and arrangements of a cloth. According to Cleanthes, experience shows that the mind has a principle of order (Humes p.12). Due to the similarity in effects, we can deduce a similarity in causes – hence God is similar to Man, though the former is more supernatural. From the view of Cleanthes about existence of God, it is clear that he defends religion in their view of God’s existence. Religion suggests that God exists as the creator of the universe, and man is part of his creation. It suggests that Man resembles God, and he continues the creation of God by designing things through his mind/intelligence and thought. This indicates that Man continues God’s creation in a similar way that God created nature/the universe. This religious perspective is the same position of Cleanthes, indicating that Cleanthes is a defender of religion, as suggested by Demea in Hume’s dialogue. Generally, Cleanthes contends that God exists and that he resembles human beings in mind and intelligence. Through the Hume’s dialogue, it is possible to identify some criticisms of Cleanthes perspective. One of the prominent critics is Philo who engaged in a dialogue with Cleanthes. Philo argued that even if nature offers evidence of intelligent design, we can infer nothing as to the nature of the designer (or perhaps designers). He argues that everyone agrees with the existence of God, but the bond of contention is his nature. Philo contends that perfection is a relative term, and that human beings cannot correctly claim that they understand the attributes of a divine God (Humes p.13). According to him, it is even more unrealistic for human beings to think that the perfections of God are in any way analogous to human creature’s perfections. Opposing the propositions of Cleanthes, Philo suggested that God is infinitely superior to our limited understanding and blurred view. He questions the use of experience to explain the similarity of God with man by arguing that the ideas of human beings cannot go beyond their experience. Yet we do not have an experience of divine attributes and operations such as those of God. I agree with Philo to the extent that he suggests that God has infinite attributes which cannot be compared with those of man, but I disagree with his assertion that we can infer nothing about the nature of the designer of nature. In my view, I think that experience plays a significant role in informing us that God has infinite attributes similar to the intelligence and mind of human beings. While is true that God has infinite attributes, there is no reason to suppose that such attributes are similar in nature to the mind and intelligence of human beings. Even though there dissimilarities in various designs of human creatures and animals, that does not mean that they are completely obscure. The dissimilarity between the designs of two human beings does not mean that those human beings are different; they are both human beings with human intelligence and human mind. In the same way, the dissimilarity in terms of divine nature between the design of God and human beings does not mean they are different; they both have a similar mind and intelligence. Therefore, I agree with Cleanthes that God exists and that he resembles human mind and intelligence. A theist would respond to the challenge of Philo by suggesting that God created human beings to be similar to him; so God resembles human beings. While I agree with theists in existence of a divine God who resembles a human being, I would object their story of creation which suggests that God created human beings to become similar to him. I find this perspective unrealistic because I do not think that a divine being like God would be such biased to the extent that he favors human beings over other creatures. Works cited Hume, D. Dialogues concerning Natural Religion. Jonathan Bennett. 2004. Read More