A. Start off by summarizing Anselm’s argument for God’s existence in your own words. After summarizing Anselm’s argument, state if you think if it is a good argument or not. Why or why not?
B. Reflect on Aquinas’ arguments for God’s existence. Do you think that they are compelling arguments for God’s existence? If so, why, if not, why not?
C. Suppose that Paley is offering an analogical argument for God’s existence. Then we would take his argument to be like this.
Look at a watch, it has certain features such as order and intricately integrated parts that serve some purpose. This is similar to lots of things that exist such as the eye, animals, and plants, which exhibit order and intricately integrated parts that serve some purpose. Thus, since watches have a designer, there needs to be a designer of all of the things that exist in the universe. This designer of everything in the universe is God.
An argument from analogy breaks down if there is enough dissimilarity between the two objects being compared. Is this a problem for Paley’s argument (again assuming that he’s arguing by analogy)? Why or why not?
D. Think about the argument for God’s existence developed by Collins. The argument can be represented like this:
(1) Our universe is fine-tuned to sustain conscious, intelligent life.
The best explanation of (1) is that an intelligent designer such as God created our universe.
Assess the strength of this argument for God’s existence. Do you think that it provides good reason to believe in God? Why or why not?
Need this by 5 PM Eastern Time Today.