The complexity of the universe and life can be explained if we believe that God exists.
The world is not created in random. Every life, everything on Earth is created with a purpose and specification. With this much intricate and incredible details, it is difficult to believe that the world and our universe are simply created by accidents. Thus, there must be a designer behind all these sophistications as they are too complex to be created by chance. This designer is not just a mere designer but an intelligent one for the things He made are not only meant to carry out specifications but if one or more parts of the mechanisms are removed or changed, they will lose their functional values.
Looking into the Fine Tuning Argument, the probability of
…show more content…
a fine-tuned universe is so small that intelligent design seemed more likely to be the probable explanation. It is too coincidental that so many things could be exactly what they need to be for life to exist in the universe. Although it may be highly improbable that an event occurs by chance, it is still disputable that it requires a designer for the event to occur.
1Suppose we flip a fair coin 1000 times and record the results in succession, the probability of getting the particular outcome is vanishingly small: 1 in 21000 to be precise. It is clear that such a sequence is so improbable but it does not give us any reason to think that it was the result of intelligent design.
On the contrary, George N. Schlesinger formulate an objection to the argument above by comparing the rational probability of a person winning the lottery.
2If John wins a 1-in-1,000,000,000 lottery game, you would not immediately be tempted to think that John cheated. If, however, John won three consecutive 1-in-1,000 lotteries, you would immediately be tempted to think that John cheated instead.
In the latter situation, it is quite queer to see a person getting lucky and win all three consecutive games which brings a justified belief that John's winnings are intended acts of a particular's intelligent agency be it by John himself or with the assistance of others. Meanwhile, the former happens as an unexpected event which vindicates a conjecture of an intelligent
design. In summary, the fact that the universe is fine-tuned for the sustainability of life is improbable in the same way as John's winning three consecutive lotteries. Thus, it is obviously more reasonable to believe that God, an intelligent agent deliberately structured the universe to be hospitable than it is to believe that somehow this occurred by chance. 1 2 http://www.iep.utm.edu/design/
We see a very disturbing ending in the Shirley Jackson’s, The Lottery where the reader believes that the lottery in mention is solely a monetary game of chance, like in our lives presently. However,
To infer God’s existence by ‘Argument from Design’, Rachel has taken the example of amazing things that are present in nature around us such as eye, the most complicated part of body system, the way eye is attached to the human body and the phenomenon by which it performs it function is astounding and such types of creations cannot be occurred randomly by chance. Although, it is only the creation of some intelligent designer. Whereas, in the case of evolution and intelligent design, the author put forward the “Theory of Natural Selection” given by Darwin. In this theory, Darwin stated that evolution occurred among the species due to the changes in their environmental conditions and to adopt these changes, certain changes take place among the specific characteristics of the species in response to such environmental conditions. Therefore, through the process of natural selection, organisms passed their newly adapted characteristics to their off springs and then new generations born with such characteristics which help them to survive and reproduce in altered environmental conditions.
Michelson, D. The historical reception of Shirley Jackson's "the lottery". In: KURZBAN, Robert; PLATEK, Steve. 18th annual meeting of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society at the University of Pennsylvania and Drexel University. 2006.
The following two paragraphs are a summary of Gloria Jimenez's essay Against the Odds and Against the Common Good. States should neither allow nor encourage state-run lotteries. There are five major arguments that people use to defend lotteries. One is that most lotteries are run honestly, but if gambling is harmful to society it is irrelevant to argue if they are honest or not. The second is that lotteries create jobs, but there are only a small handful of jobs that would be eliminated if lotteries were put out of business. Another argument that would support keeping lotteries is that, other than gambling addicts, people freely choose to buy lottery tickets. This is true, however, there are misleading advertisements that may cause people to buy tickets under false pretenses.
Prior to reading about this study I had always thought that richer people played the lottery much more than those with less money. I always just assumed that because the rich had a lot of money that they just played for the heck of it and could afford to spend hundreds of dollars on purchasing tickets. But after the conclusion of their experiment proved otherwise I was pretty shocked., and after reading why it was that poorer people actually spent more on tickets it made so much more sense and I was able to see exactly why that was.
On December 2,2015 I went to to the Lynnhaven building to receive some feedback on my agreement paper for English 111. It was a very rainy day after running through the rain when I reached the writing center room. There was a yellow note saying that the writing center was in the student center until December 4,2015. After reading the note I ran back in the rain to my car.It was to cold to walk it was raining. As I approached the student center I was told by a security guard that the tutoring lab was located on the third floor. I had walked up three flights of stairs. When I had finally reached the third floor,I walk into the tutoring lab. There were about eight tables, but only four staff members and one student. Amen had approached me asking what did I need help with today. I replied saying that I would like some feedback on my paper for English. He then pointed to the writing table and said “she can assist you with your paper”.
...cartes would have said according to Pascal, all God did, was put a fillip in things to get them going. Look at all that came of it; it is amazing. Before humans had an understanding of how the universe arrived at its current state, they could see that it was divinely inspired and turned to God for explanation.
Another counter-argument to the argument from design is evolutionary theory or Darwinism. This theory explains the appearance of biological design in nature (Himma). Scientists have demonstrated that the chemical origin of life is compatible with certain natural laws. Scientists have also explained the mechanisms by which life developed from simple to complex and how it continues to develop. The most important factor is that blind chance is not the only alternative to divine design; it is instead the cumulative process of natural selection. Therefore, the theory of evolution provides a much more convincing explanation that the argument from design because science provides a workable and testable explanation of how complexity came from simplicity.
A possible argument for preferring the God hypothesis runs as follows. A physical force strength or elementary particle mass can often seem to have required tuning to such and such a numerical value, plus or minus very little, for several different reasons.
The editorial I chose to analyze was “Should elderly drivers face different licensing rules” by Scott Martelle from the Los Angeles Times. The Toulmin Model of Argument is essential to writing a good argumentative editorial, paper, or article. I will be using the Toulmin Model formula and breaking it down into its six parts to analyze this editorial. The Toulmin model was created by Stephen Toulmin, a former British logician and now a college professor at the University of Southern California. Toulmin, himself found trouble applying basic logic to everyday arguments. Toulmin proceeded to create an improved model of practical reasoning and the understanding of arguments. The first stage of the Toulmin model consists of three parts: claim, data,
Being in his seventy-seventh lottery, Old Man Warner is separated from the rest of the town. He has beaten the Lottery seventy-seven times, and therefore holds a certain sense of invincibility, and that leads to his devotion to it. Maybe that’s how everyone feels. Since they’ve survived the Lottery, they have a respect for it, and see nothing wrong with keeping it. In fact, they find the notion of not having the lottery preposterous, just because everyone has always thought that, and they just go along with what everyone thinks. Maybe it’s not so much the aspect of survival that is a...
However, it has been shown through decades of research that behavioral events are not predictable. Researchers tend to conclude that if they are to truly understand behavior then they must be able to develop a system which allows them to forecast the occurrence of certain behavior patterns. Conversely, if they are unable to state consecutively when and why a pattern is presented then they have failed to understand the event. In order to retain a sense that the universe is orderly the unpredictable results are often explained through the fault of the experimenter, that adequate control was not kept over the experimental situation. Through the Harvard Law of Animal Behavior ("under carefully controlled experimental circumstances, an animal will behave as it damned well pleases.") these "failed" experiments are incorporated into a succinct postulate which allows for the exploration of reason and desirability of such unpredictability (1).
“The greatest mystery of existence is existence itself” (Chopra). Chopra, a world-renowned author, perceives the existence of life as a truly mystifying cerebration. The pending question that many scientist, and even theists, attempt to answer is how life ultimately began. Currently, the mystery is left with two propositions, evolution and creation. While both approaches attempt to answer the origins of life, evolution and creation are two contrasting concepts. Evolution views life to be a process by which organisms diversified from earlier forms whereas creation illustrates that life was created by a supernatural being. Creation and evolution both agree on the existence of microevolution and the resemblance of apes and humans but vary in terms of interpreting the origins of the life through a historical standpoint. A concept known as Faith Vs Fact comprehensively summarizes the tone of this debate, which leads the question of how life began.
The existence of God or rather an intelligent being with define abilities has been a contentious issue of discussion since time immemorial. There are as many people advocating for divinity in the creation of the universe as there are people doubting the existence of this Supreme Being with unique and really frightening capabilities who designed and created the universe. Among the chief advocates of the thought of the existence of God and perfect order in the creation of the universe is William Paley. William Paley brings forth among the best arguments ever brought forward advocating for the existence of God and the nature in which the universe is bordered as sufficient evidence of the existence of this divine being responsible for the materialization of the universe and its exact design. William Paley begins his argument by talking about a scenario, which involves him walking along a path. “During his walk he hits his leg on a rock but pays very little attention to the rock” (Paley, 2000, p.12). This is because at the back if his mind he knows that the rock has been there for a very long time verging on forever. William Paley creates an alternate scenario with him walking down the same path. In this alternate scenario he just so happens to hit his leg on a watch. The reaction to the watch is very different from the reaction to the rock. William Paley says that this disparity to the watch in comparison to the rock is caused by purpose. Thus William Paley introduces the concept of telos. Telos means purpose. It is a term that refers to the exact purpose of a given object in the universe and exactly how this purpose relates to the object as well as the level of perfection and prowess to which this object in question fulfill...
...ny people also willingly convince themselves that their financial condition is hopeless, and prudent financial discipline is pointless and the lottery is a valid way of fixing their problems and/or saving for the future. Just think, “Is that money always going to be there”? Because the stakes are some what so high and the chances of winning so minimal, however, is participating in the lottery a waste of cash or simply a high risk investment opportunity that is worth a weekly gamble?