Philosophical Arguments (Essay Sample)

Name Institution Course Instructor Date Philosophical Arguments Over the years, philosophers have come up with various theories and arguments in their attempts to explain the existence of God. Some of these arguments do not have a Christian origin but Muslim and Jewish philosophers have also made significant contributions to religious, philosophical arguments. These arguments about God are the ontological argument, the teleological argument, and the cosmological argument. Although there are other arguments regarding the existence of God, in this discussion we are going to discuss these three each of whose strengths and weaknesses will be outlined. The Ontological Argument The ontological argument tries to prove the existence of God solely through abstract reasoning. Most of these arguments tend to be starting with a priori (no empirical evidence involved at all) theory about the universe. According to ontological arguments, one needs not to go out to look for the physical proof of the existence of God but rather we can just think about it and work out that he exists. According to Szatkowski, ontological contention asserts that the thought that God doesn't exist is almost as crazy as the idea that a four-sided triangle does (38). As indicated by the ontological claim, we can tell that the case that God doesn't exist is false without looking into it at any point of interest. Generally as realizing what "triangle" means makes it clear that a four-sided triangle is unthinkable, the contention proposes, recognizing what "God" means makes it evident that God's non-presence is incomprehensible. The case that God does not exist is self-opposing. If we somehow managed to consider God as not existing, however, then we would have the capacity to envision him being superior to anything he is. Besides, we would have the ability to envision him existing, and a God that exists is obviously superior to a God that doesn't. To consider God not existing, then, is to consider God being blemished because a God that doesn't exist could be superior to anything he is (Vaughn, 39). Strengths and weaknesses of the ontological argument This argument does not rely on upon variable and changing confirmation since the definition is total and fundamental. Along these lines, you can reach precise determinations that are not ambiguous. This argument likewise implies there is no other possible conclusion apart from that God exists. On top of this, all the key terms utilized have altered and lasting implications – no space for dubiousness once more. It likewise offers a genuine confirmation for God's presence that can be mentally faced off regarding instead of depending on the variable evidence. The main weakness of the argument is that Gaunilo of Marmoutier, Anselm’s contemporary. Through the analogy of the perfect island, he proved that if so, then the argument could be used to demonstrate the existence of anything. As such, the argument can have absurd consequences. According to David Home, the argument lacks empirical reasoning and disagrees that anything can exist necessarily (Vaughn, 42). The Teleological Argument This argument is also called the Design argument. The basic premise of the argument concerning the existence of God is that human artifacts are as a result of intelligent designs thus have a purpose. It argues that for all the order, coherence, design and complexity, there is an intelligent designer that is God. According to Manson, the designer handles the order and original purpose that we observe, and thus he exists (43). Paley argues that God is to the universe like a watchmaker is to watch, and the former handles the intelligent complexity of the universe like the latter is for the beauty of the watch. The argument suggests that the universe is more gigantic and complex when compared to human artifacts. As such, there exists a powerful and vastly intelligent designer behind the scenes that is God (Manson, 44). Strengths and weaknesses This argument is simple to understand and logically reasonable because it bases its basis on observable deign of the world. It has a merit because human beings are a design from the intelligent designer, God. Since humans are creators of the universe, it is rational to think about the things have a purpose. Besides, both revealed theology and natural theology support the argument. We can agree that the complexity and creative nature of the universe must have been done by an intelligent designer, God. The weaknesses of this argument can be divided into philosophical and scientific. The argument fails to measure the amount of order h that is available. Besides, there is no other universe to compare this one too and thus the apt design analogy is not justified. Further, the argument fails to prove the infinity of the designer of the universe. From parts to the whole, the analogy is incoherent. According to evolution, there is no need for a designer since the slow processes of random genetic mutation can achieve the complex systems in the universe. The argument leads to a prob...