A critical examination of the three foundations of the Teleogical argument, from the perspective of John Hospers

Authors

1 Ph.D. Student, of Philosophy, Farabi Campus University of Tehran, Qom, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Farabi Campus University of Tehran, Qom, Iran

10.22080/jre.2024.28028.1221

Abstract

The Argument of Order is one of the simplest and most general arguments for the existence of God. This argument consists of two premises and a conclusion, and in Islamic texts, especially in theological discussions, it is more supported and supported than other arguments. On the other hand, some Western philosophers have questioned the validity of this argument. This research is dedicated to examining and analyzing the criticisms of Dr. John Hospers, head of the Department of Philosophy and professor at the University of Southern California, regarding the three main pillars of this argument (the concept of order, the order of the world, and the design of order). In addition, the lack of attention to his works also adds to the importance of this issue. John Hospers has brought the most serious problems to the field of theology in two books, "The Philosophy of Religion" and "An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis". The following research analyzes and examines John Hospers' criticisms of the three pillars of the Argument of Order. The method of this research includes data collection, library studies, and critical analysis of the materials based on the sources available in John Hospers' works. According to the findings of this research, it is clear that Hospers' criticisms of the three pillars of the argument from order do not seem acceptable from a logical and scientific perspective, because "order" has a clear concept that does not need a definition, and it is possible to reach the designer of a phenomenon from the order of it, even if its designer has not been observed.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics