Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer.
Hi, need to submit a 750 words essay on the topic Analysis of one of Humes arguments touching on the existence of God.Hume compares God’s (the Designer’s) created systems and the intended purpose
Hi, need to submit a 750 words essay on the topic Analysis of one of Humes arguments touching on the existence of God.
Hume compares God’s (the Designer’s) created systems and the intended purpose on creation. In using the two characters, Cleanthes and Philo, Hume weigh both sides of the creator. Cleanthes supports the rationale of the Designer’s creations and attests that the designer is both never-ending and munificent in his creation. Both characters agree on one point that the Designer had a wise plan in his creation and that human suffering is evident in the world (Tweyman 84). However, in his work, it is evident that Hume inclines his arguments to Philo who argues that the Designer’s purpose was for human’s goodwill ought to eliminate the recurrent human suffering, and the conflicts between humans and other organisms.
Cleanthes attempts to compare the designer’s intended purpose on the creation with that of machines shows the significance and interrelations of every aspect of creation in comparison to the roles various functional parts of a machine. However, Philo attacks Cleanthes’ hypothesis using a cause-effect approach and argues that the world designs do not uphold Cleanthes’ arguments (Tweyman 85).
In his arguments to counter act Cleanthes’ beliefs on the Designer’s purpose on creation, Philo explains the unsatisfactory nature of both humans and animals and explains that the Designer ought to intervene since he is power is never-ending. As such, he argues that the creator’s purpose was that his creations could not be happy. At one point, Philo doubts the capability of the Creator’s ability to eliminate various evils of the world. Philo asserts that if the creator is willing to eliminate the evils and does endeavor to eliminate such evils, then he is powerless. He gives another assertion that if the Designer is capable of eliminating such crimes but does not do so, he ought to be malevolent. Conversely, Philo asserts that there ought to be no evils and human suffering if the Designer is both capacitated and
