Teleological Argument (Aquinas)

[Colt]

We see various objects.........

"In science the human self observes the material world; philosophy is the observation of this observation of the material world; religion, true spiritual experience, is the experiential realization of the cosmic reality of the observation of the observation of all this relative synthesis of the energy materials of time and space. To build a philosophy of the universe on an exclusive materialism is to ignore the fact that all things material are initially conceived as real in the experience of human consciousness. The observer cannot be the thing observed; evaluation demands some degree of transcendence of the thing which is evaluated." UB 1955 IMOP

What we observe in nature, or the natural order of things is not God rather the habits of God. I don't know why it's not obvious to all this thinking that in order to observe the universe one must be apart from it. The 5th Way" of Aquinas is one man's observation of innate habits in nature. This doesn't prove anything other than someone observing something which other observers can agree is an observation.

 

[Koldo]

... because it shows there are "goals" or "ends" that nonconscious things "aim" at.

But you are not showing that. You are still merely just stating that again.

 

[Koldo]

How the hell would you know what faith is or isn't to a theist?

By reading and listening to what they say.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

... because it shows there are "goals" or "ends" that nonconscious things "aim" at.

Ultimately, the "end" that any physical process is "aiming at" is the thermal equilibrium of the universe.

Why does this never seem to come up in these discussions (besides the fact that Aristotle didn't know about entropy)?

 

[PureX]

By reading and listening to what they say.

You didn't' listen to me. Instead, you just ignored and dismissed what you didn't want to accept because it wrecks your bias against theism.

 

[Koldo]

You didn't' listen to me. Instead, you just ignored and dismissed what you didn't want to accept because it wrecks your bias against theism.

I didn't simply dismiss you. I listened to you and stated you are projecting. Your view is not representative of theists in general.

 

[Ostronomos]

What a self-centered - almost solpisistic - view of the universe.

"How *I* think a thing should be used tells me what its inherent 'purpose' is. If *I* see no use for a thing, then the thing has no purpose."

No. Reality doesn't care what you think of it. Reality is what it is regardless of how you view it.

Not to mention it has non-material or supernatural properties. However these can only be accessed when one enters other worlds/ universes during sleep or other means.

 

[Ostronomos]

Philosophy can reach many conclusions about all sorts of things -- and be wrong in all of them.

One possibility, that physics could potentially show, is that "nothing" is unstable, and breaks down naturally into positive and negative "somethings." This would require no metaphysics at all -- and once there, materialism would be a real thing.

Can you please tell us how a supernatural consciousness can arise from matter? I ask this rhetorically. Because from this it naturally follows that reality must have supernatural properties. E.g. it observes itself through our eyes.

 

[ratiocinator]

Can you please tell us how a supernatural consciousness can arise from matter? I ask this rhetorically. Because from this it naturally follows that reality must have supernatural properties. E.g. it observes itself through our eyes.

You appear to have forgotten to include the evidence or reasoning that for anything supernatural. If your example about our own awareness is supposed to be it, it's about as convincing as "wow, this is difficult to understand, it must be magic!"

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Can you please tell us how a supernatural consciousness can arise from matter? I ask this rhetorically. Because from this it naturally follows that reality must have supernatural properties. E.g. it observes itself through our eyes.

Excuse me, but where did I ever such a thing? To me, it is an absurd notion, since I don't believe in anything "supernatural" at all.

 

[Ponder This]

Yes, intelligence can do this but the 5th way comes from simple and obvious examples of final causality in nature.

It's a solid argument, but what does Aristotle really mean by "intelligence" as you put it.

If I were to make a top and set the top to spinning on a desk. Then the role of my intelligence in this end was that I had conceived the end before the end was (possibly) achieved. Moreover, I would have taken action to cause the intended end.

From this, are we to understand that Aristotle means that the moon orbits the Earth because an intelligence (which we call God) conceived the notion of the moon orbiting the Earth, intended that the moon orbit the Earth, and took some action to bring about that end?

 

[Madsaac]

All of causality can be traced to that particular cosmic phenomenon, you think?

Well, maybe. But that doesn’t really answer the question, Why is there something rather than nothing? Or, Why does the universe go to all the trouble of existing?

Yes but what is more likely?

Creation happened because of something divine (Or whatever you want to call it) or creation happened because of 'natural selection' which is near fact?

People can disagree on this forever but I think we should make our minds up with the information, theories and facts that we have available to us. And they clearly point to one conclusion.

It's the same when trying decide on anything, you believe what's correct because of the available information.

 

[Madsaac]

The universe has given us the ability to seek an understanding of itself. It would be logical to assume that we are therefor intended to do that.

And in doing that, we give ourselves an existential purpose to fulfill.

Yes, and all this had happened because of evolution.

We are seeking to understand the universe because of evolution.

We have a purpose because of evolution.

With everything we know as humans, what's more likely? We are here because we were created by a divine being or because of natural selection?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Can you please tell us how a supernatural consciousness can arise from matter? I ask this rhetorically. Because from this it naturally follows that reality must have supernatural properties. E.g. it observes itself through our eyes.

It seems like putting the cart before the horse to ask this before establishing that "supernatural consciousness" can exist at all.

... or even that "supernatural" is a coherent concept.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Yes but what is more likely?

Creation happened because of something divine (Or whatever you want to call it) or creation happened because of 'natural selection' which is near fact?

People can disagree on this forever but I think we should make our minds up with the information, theories and facts that we have available to us. And they clearly point to one conclusion.

It's the same when trying decide on anything, you believe what's correct because of the available information.

Can you explain how natural selection, which doesn’t even account for abiogenesis at this point, might in any way be responsible for the Big Bang? Because we’re considering the entire cosmos here, not just life on earth. And the Standard Model of cosmology leaves plenty of questions about the origins of the universe unanswered.

 

[RestlessSoul]

It seems like putting the cart before the horse to ask this before establishing that "supernatural consciousness" can exist at all.

... or even that "supernatural" is a coherent concept.

Consciousness exists, we know that much at least. And there is as yet no convincing solution, from science or philosophy, to the Hard Problem of Consciousness (essentially how and why humans and other organisms have qualitative subjective experience)

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Consciousness exists, we know that much at least.

Yes. But I'm not asking about consciousness generally; I'm asking about supernatural consciousness. Do you have any reason to think this exists?

And there is as yet no convincing solution, from science or philosophy, to the Hard Problem of Consciousness (essentially how and why humans and other organisms have qualitative subjective experience)

... so therefore magic?

 

[PureX]

Yes, and all this had happened because of evolution.

We are seeking to understand the universe because of evolution.

We have a purpose because of evolution.

With everything we know as humans, what's more likely? We are here because we were created by a divine being or because of natural selection?

I fail to see any logical difference.

The evolution of life forms is simply the expression of what is possible against what is not possible. As is everything else occurring in the universe. So the need for a source of those possibilities and impossibilities remains. Evolution does not somehow magically usurp that need. Neither does claiming that they 'just are', and that there is no source.

 

[ratiocinator]

Neither does claiming that they 'just are', and that there is no source.

But said source can 'just be' without explanation.

Double standards or what?

 

[RestlessSoul]

Yes. But I'm not asking about consciousness generally; I'm asking about supernatural consciousness. Do you have any reason to think this exists?




... so therefore magic?

So therefore phenomena on which it may require original and/or creative thinking to shed some light. This requirement frequently stumps the unimaginative, of course.