چکیده:
The argument of order has been one of the most widely used arguments in philosophy and theology to prove the existence of God from the past to the present. The simplicity of the structure and high comprehensibility of this argument have caused it to find a special place among both the common people and thinkers. On the other hand, criticisms from philosophers such as David Hume have challenged the validity of this argument. This research, using an analytical-comparative method, first introduces and examines the argument of order and analyzes Hume's criticisms, and then focuses on Professor Motahari's responses to Hume's criticisms and evaluates them. Finally, it briefly refers to the views of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli on the limits, applications, and validity of this argument. This research attempts to examine the limits of the validity of the argument of order by comparative examination of these views and explain that this argument alone is not a suitable way to prove the existence of God and cannot be considered a pure philosophical argument.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Critique and Examination of the Argument from Design in Proving the Existence of God, Based on Hume's Critiques and an Evaluation of Professor Motahhari's Responses, along with an Explanation of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli's Views Mohammad Hossein Abbasi Philosophy Student, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.
The aim of this research is to, using an analytical-comparative approach, first introduce and examine the structure of the argument from design and analyze the critiques introduced by Hume to this argument, and then evaluate the responses given by Professor Motahhari to Hume's objections; also, while providing a general analysis of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli's views on this matter, it finally aims to determine, firstly, that Professor Motahhari's responses to Hume's critiques are subject to criticism, and secondly, to state that the argument through design does not possess sufficient scientific and philosophical validity and cannot be a useful way to prove the existence of God. 2.
In his first critique, Hume believes that the main flaw of this proof is the incorrect empirical analogy between the universe and human artifacts, which is actually considered the primary basis of the argument from design.
The Sixth Critique In the end, Hume states that the argument from order, even if it possesses correct premises and a correct conclusion, only proves a designer for the world and not the God of the Abrahamic religions that religious people intend.
(
, 
, 
)
