Philo 5 (2):161-173 (2002)
|Abstract||The main aim of this paper is to examine an almost universal assumption concerning the structure of Paley’s argument for design. Almost all commentators suppose that Paley’s argument is an inductive argument---either an argument by analogy or an argument by inference to the best explanation. I contend, on the contrary, that Paley’s argument is actually a straightforwardly deductive argument. Moreover, I argue that, when Paley’s argument is properly understood, it can readily be seen that it is no good. Finally---although I do not stress this very much---I note that the points that I make about Paley’s argument can carryover to modern design arguments that are based upon the argument that Paley actually gives|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jonah N. Schupbach (2005). Paley's Inductive Inference to Design. Philosophia Christi 7 (2):491-502.
Bill Spencer (2006). Paley's Teleological Argument and Its Significance. Dialogue 48 (2-3):62 - 65.
John Kronen & Sandra Menssen (2012). Hylomorphism and Design. The Modern Schoolman 89 (3-4):155-180.
Helen de Cruz & Johan de Smedt (2010). Paley's Ipod: The Cognitive Basis of the Design Argument Within Natural Theology. Zygon 45 (3):665-684.
Andre Ariew (2007). Teleology. In David L. Hull & Michael Ruse (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology. Cambridge University Press.
Francisco J. Ayala (2003). Intelligent Design: The Original Version. Theology and Science 1 (1):9-32.
S. Gliboff (2000). Paley's Design Argument as an Inference to the Best Explanation, or, Dawkins' Dilemma. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 31 (4):579-597.
Branden Fitelson (1999). How Not to Detect Design. [REVIEW] Philosophy of Science 66 (3):472 - 488.
Elliott Sober (1999). How Not to Detect Design. [REVIEW] Philosophy of Science 66 (3):472 - 488.
Bruce H. Weber (2011). Design and its Discontents. Synthese 178 (2):271 - 289.
Alexander Stewart (2006). Arguments for the Existence of God: The British Debate. In The Cambridge History of Eighteenth-Century Philosophy, Volume 2. Cambridge Univ Pr.
Nicholas Humphrey (2006). Consciousness: The Achilles Heel of Darwinism? Thank God, Not Quite. In John Brockman (ed.), Intelligent Thought: Science Versus the Intelligent Design Movement. Vintage.
Armin W. Schulz (2008). Structural Flaws: Massive Modularity and the Argument From Design. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (4):733-743.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads24 ( #57,851 of 722,935 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 722,935 )
How can I increase my downloads?