INSTRUCTIONS
Paley and Pascal have divergent approaches to the possibility of apologetics and to the relation between faith and reason. What are their respective advantages and disadvantages? Are the two positions reconcilable? Which of the two would be the most effective today and why?
ANSWER
Paley’s arguments concerning the interplay of reason and faith have a number of advantages. First, there is a chance that Paley is correct in saying that God is a very powerful Christian God and that he exists. Second, he purports that sometimes God must allow evil to occur in order to bring about good. Third, because evolution does not explain itself and because it is compatible with theism in any case, it does not disprove the design argument. Fourth, Paley does come to the conclusion that the creator is transcendent and metaphysical. Finally, the anthropic principle strengthens Paley’s claim that intentionality can be seen in nature. Many people believe Paley’s inductive argument to be logical and persuasive because it is deceptively straightforward. Paley’s arguments have some flaws despite their many advantages. First, since it is an inductive proof, the conclusion is.. To access full answer, use the purchase button below.