Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.5040/9781350093881.ch-014
K. Kwan
{"title":"The Argument from Religious Experience","authors":"K. Kwan","doi":"10.5040/9781350093881.ch-014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350093881.ch-014","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":415152,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Arguments in Natural Theology","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128527073","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.5040/9781350093881.ch-003
Jason Megill
Below is a summary of one of the more famous versions of the Ontological Argument, that of Saint Anselm of Canterbury in his Proslogium . This is very similar to Descartes' version of the Ontological Argument in his Meditations , which will be discussed in lecture. You can read an electronic version of Anselm's argument here; you can read an electronic copy of Descartes' Meditations here. can adapt the sequence of my reasoning, I will discover that thing , and will give him his lost island, not to be lost again." (Emphasis mine.)
{"title":"The Ontological Argument","authors":"Jason Megill","doi":"10.5040/9781350093881.ch-003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350093881.ch-003","url":null,"abstract":"Below is a summary of one of the more famous versions of the Ontological Argument, that of Saint Anselm of Canterbury in his Proslogium . This is very similar to Descartes' version of the Ontological Argument in his Meditations , which will be discussed in lecture. You can read an electronic version of Anselm's argument here; you can read an electronic copy of Descartes' Meditations here. can adapt the sequence of my reasoning, I will discover that thing , and will give him his lost island, not to be lost again.\" (Emphasis mine.)","PeriodicalId":415152,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Arguments in Natural Theology","volume":"84 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130387287","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.5040/9781350093881.ch-013
William A. Lauinger
{"title":"The Argument from Desire","authors":"William A. Lauinger","doi":"10.5040/9781350093881.ch-013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350093881.ch-013","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":415152,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Arguments in Natural Theology","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134098793","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.5040/9781350093881.ch-005
M. Behe
This chapter argues that advances in our understanding of the molecular level of life overwhelmingly support the conclusion that, to a very large degree, life is the intended product of a designing mind. Several general characteristics of the design argument will be noted here at the outset. The first characteristic to note is that the argument for design from biochemistry is in large part an empirical argument. That is, it depends critically on our detailed understanding of the physical structures and processes of life. In turn, that means it depends on the progress of science in elucidating those structures and processes, and that the persuasiveness of the argument can shift with empirical discoveries. Such discoveries have been made since Darwin first put forward his theory. It has been only since the middle of the twentieth century—a hundred years after Darwin’s work, when the double helical structure of DNA and the irregular functional shape of the oxygen-binding protein myoglobin were discovered—that biology has begun to grasp the mechanisms of the molecular foundation of life. Over the past seventy years progress has accelerated enormously with the development of powerful new laboratory tools. An overarching discovery is that the foundational level of life is run by astoundingly complex molecular machinery. That key breakthrough drives much of the argument here. Furthermore, although it is an empirical observation, it is very secure; future work may show life to have greater functional intricacy than we now recognize, but it will not show it to have less. In addition to empirical data, the argument for design from biochemistry requires logical ties to connect the data to the conclusion. Unlike other writers such as David Hume,1 who cast the design argument mainly as one from analogy, Steven Meyer,2 who sees it as an inference to the best explanation, or Elliott Sober,3 who treats it as a likelihood argument, I consider the design argument to be an inductive one. That is, as we shall see, by considering how we draw conclusions that some inanimate systems were purposely designed, common elements can be extracted to guide us when attempting to decide if some biochemical systems were purposely designed. 5
{"title":"The Argument from Biological Complexity","authors":"M. Behe","doi":"10.5040/9781350093881.ch-005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350093881.ch-005","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter argues that advances in our understanding of the molecular level of life overwhelmingly support the conclusion that, to a very large degree, life is the intended product of a designing mind. Several general characteristics of the design argument will be noted here at the outset. The first characteristic to note is that the argument for design from biochemistry is in large part an empirical argument. That is, it depends critically on our detailed understanding of the physical structures and processes of life. In turn, that means it depends on the progress of science in elucidating those structures and processes, and that the persuasiveness of the argument can shift with empirical discoveries. Such discoveries have been made since Darwin first put forward his theory. It has been only since the middle of the twentieth century—a hundred years after Darwin’s work, when the double helical structure of DNA and the irregular functional shape of the oxygen-binding protein myoglobin were discovered—that biology has begun to grasp the mechanisms of the molecular foundation of life. Over the past seventy years progress has accelerated enormously with the development of powerful new laboratory tools. An overarching discovery is that the foundational level of life is run by astoundingly complex molecular machinery. That key breakthrough drives much of the argument here. Furthermore, although it is an empirical observation, it is very secure; future work may show life to have greater functional intricacy than we now recognize, but it will not show it to have less. In addition to empirical data, the argument for design from biochemistry requires logical ties to connect the data to the conclusion. Unlike other writers such as David Hume,1 who cast the design argument mainly as one from analogy, Steven Meyer,2 who sees it as an inference to the best explanation, or Elliott Sober,3 who treats it as a likelihood argument, I consider the design argument to be an inductive one. That is, as we shall see, by considering how we draw conclusions that some inanimate systems were purposely designed, common elements can be extracted to guide us when attempting to decide if some biochemical systems were purposely designed. 5","PeriodicalId":415152,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Arguments in Natural Theology","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125869783","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.5040/9781350093881.ch-011
W. Craig
{"title":"The Argument from the Applicability of Mathematics","authors":"W. Craig","doi":"10.5040/9781350093881.ch-011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350093881.ch-011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":415152,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Arguments in Natural Theology","volume":"9 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132119069","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.5040/9781350093881.ch-018
S. Menssen, T. Sullivan
{"title":"The Argument from Ramified Natural Theology","authors":"S. Menssen, T. Sullivan","doi":"10.5040/9781350093881.ch-018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350093881.ch-018","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":415152,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Arguments in Natural Theology","volume":"216 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122390854","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：