Phil 101 - Third Excercise Question

Phil 101 - Third Excercise Question - Simon Wong Third...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Simon Wong 2/26/06 Third Exercise Question TA: Joe Yardbrough Cleathes, unlike Demea and Philo, uses an empirical method to form his argument. Cleanthes relies heavily on inductive reasoning (where similar causes produce similar effects). Cleanthes achieved his design argument by noticing that since as we see in the universe, things that serve a purpose are usually designed. Furthermore, things that are designed also have designers. Cleanthes then states that the universe seems to serve purpose, therefore it is designed, and more importantly it has a designer. He then takes one step further in which he states that the designer is a human-like God (since all perceived designers have been human). Philo is completely opposed to this method of logic. First, Philo makes the weak analogy counter argument. The best analogies, says Philo, start with something similar to what we are trying to explain. However, something designed by humans such as a car is not similar to the universe. Philo’s examples were comparing blood to sap and comparing the growth of hair to the generation
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.
Ask a homework question - tutors are online