Tuesday, November 6, 2018
God -- Or Some Lesser Designer
In Chapter V, Philo devises several arguments that accept that the universe has a designer, but deny that that designer is God. Given our traditional definition that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, is Philo correct? Or is there a response to his arguments? Does it matter if the designer is the traditional God?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
While the characteristic of a god can be disputed, Philo is correct in resolving that a ‘universal creator’ doesn’t actually need to be anything more than a powerful designer, who is similar to ourselves: using the traditional definition for God, it can then be inferred that there is no God, but only some sort of designer. Looking into more detail, Philo makes an analogy between the universe as a whole, and a machine (one which has been crafted by man). Essentially, the universe can be seen as a giant machine which has a specific function and a set of properties. Furthermore, this machine can be broken up into many other smaller parts and machines which each have their own smaller function. Using this, we can directly compare the machine known as the universe, to our own machines and designs. For example, a watch has a primary function of conveniently displaying time, however, the hands on the watch, while a part of the watch and existing to serve the watches larger function, is its own machine with its own smaller function. Shifting from the topic, this same argument could also be used to ‘prove’ that there is a purpose (function) to the universe, even if that purpose to have no purpose. Moving back, this comparison leads us to believe that the universe must have a designer since, like a watch, it exists and has a function. From this, not only is the existence of a creator ‘proven’, but the concept of a designer. This is further backed up by the idea that there isn’t actually a need for God (one who is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent) since, in our argument, a designer is the only necessary creator: the creator doesn’t need to be moral. However, while Philo’s argument rules out the necessity for such god-like qualities, it doesn’t remove their possibility (something doesn’t have to be necessary to still exist. Furthermore, we are still left with an unsatisfying conclusion of, who created the creator?
ReplyDelete