I have a paper due in too soon on the teleological argument, i need to break it down and explain it simply and also to find flaws in it!. The problem is i don't really understand it, please help!?Www@QuestionHome@Com
| Question Home |
Position:Home>Philosophy> Teleological argument?Question: Teleological argument!? I have a paper due in too soon on the teleological argument, i need to break it down and explain it simply and also to find flaws in it!. The problem is i don't really understand it, please help!?Www@QuestionHome@Com
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: Formly speaking, teleology is the study of purposes, goals, ends and functions: effect X occurs directly as a result of cause Y and therefore X is Y dependant!. "Intrinsic", or "Imminant" teleology is concerned with aiming or striving toward goals; Striving in this sense can be described as a means to an end and that this end, is the goal of the striving which is, initself, the method of the aim!. "Extrinsic" teleology covers cases where an object, event or characteristic serves a function for something!. The telelogical argument is also know as the, "Argument from Design" and is commonly be associated with Aristotle ( 384 - 322 BC )!. It is relatively simple to grasp: for example when we might find a watch in a field of stones we can infer that the watch has been created, it exhibits design and order where as a field of randomly placed stones does not which from which can be infered that within experience the world is of an order therefore something prior to the world first moved it with pre determined intention, ie!. design for purpose fitting that which is the recipient of it and respondent to it!. Or in a more existential sense, that which is the experience of it!. This argument evokes many objections!. it relies upon certain factors as given, for example, the nature of the Designer and upon what telelogy the existence of the designer is dependant; that is to say, upon what X is Y dependant in the sense of God!? If we take the concept of God to be the most likely designer/ first mover!. The argument enters into Regress in that it fails to distinguish the relative complexities of certain realilties!. Example, the reality of the Quantum universe in actuality, relative to the Human one on the horizon of what is Ontological Phenomenological (See Husserl, Heidegger, Sarte)!. I hope this has been of some use to you!. No doubt you can find out more on such sites as Wikipedia which offers comprehensive information across various threads!. Www@QuestionHome@Com |