The argument of analogy
Today in class, Daniel said we should know how the argument of analogy works and below is how I understand it so if anybody has any feedback please let me know.
The argument of Design is a posterior (something arrived by observing the world) argument for the existence of God. On page 15 in our book, Cleanthes argues that the order and design of the world shows that there is an existence of a deity which is God and he is similar to human minds and intelligence. Cleanthes compared the world to that of a machine and this lead Philo to disagree with him saying that the world does not look nothing like a machine and that it is a bad inference.
Leading to what we discussed in class as an inductive inference which states that if all A’s are B’s, S is an A so therefore S is a B. This inductive argument as said in class is not valid because it can be either weak or strong.
This is how I understand the argument of analogy: the definition of an analogy is an inference that if things agree in some respects, they probably agree in others. So let us say if Tom likes R&B, hip hop and rock music, Bob and Amy also like R&B, hip hop and rock, Ron also enjoys R&B and hip hop. So therefore we can say that Ron would probably like rock music.
An invalid example is Bob is a nerd, Rick look like Bob so Rick is a nerd. As I stated earlier, inductive argument or inference can be false for example, I am working, I worked yesterday and the day before therefore I will work tomorrow. Here, the conclusion is not true because it is possible that I am not going to work tomorrow.
The point that Cleanthes was trying to make here is that machines are made by human intelligence and the world is like a machine so the world was made by some thing of high intelligence and that is God.