Objections to the design argument

The eighteenth-century Scottish philosopher David Hume introduced a number of powerful objections to the design argument in his book Dialogues

Concerning Natural Religion.

Hume was born in 1711 in Edinburgh, Scotland. His surname was origi- nally Home but he changed it in 1734 so that it would be easier for the English to pronounce. He studied law at the University of Edinburgh but did not find the subject exciting. When he was eighteen Hume had a phys- ical and psychological breakdown, which lasted for nearly five years. In 1734 he wrote a long letter to a physician in London, asking for help. In

this letter he mentions not only his symptoms but also his intellectual life. Hume scholars find the letter interesting because it seems to suggest that Hume discovered the foundation of his philosophical system around that time. Hume’s discovery is comparable with the inspiration about a ‘marve- lous science’ that Descartes had, also in his adolescence (see Part I of this book). In the letter to the physician Hume wrote:

You must know then that, from my earliest infancy, I found always a strong inclination to books and letters. As our college education in Scotland, extending little further than the languages, ends commonly when we are about fourteen or fifteen years of age, I was after that left to my own choice in my reading, and found it incline me almost equally to books of reasoning and philosophy, and to poetry and the polite authors. every one who is acquainted either with the philosophers or critics, knows that there is nothing yet established in either of these two sciences, and that they contain little more than endless disputes, even in the most fundamental articles. Upon examination of these, I found a certain boldness of temper growing in me, which was not inclined to submit to any authority in these subjects, but led me to seek out some new medium, by which truth might be established. After much study and reflection on this, at last, when I was about eighteen years of age, there seemed to be opened up to me a new scene of thought, which transported me beyond measure, and made me, with an ardour natural to young men, throw up every other pleasure or business to apply entirely to it.52

What exactly the phrase ‘a new scene of thought’ refers to is disputed among Hume scholars. Some of them claim that it refers to the core of the theory of causation that Hume would develop later; others claim that it refers to the new inductive and experimental, as opposed to deductive and conceptual, way of thinking; and some others claim that it refers to the discovery that the idea that judgments of value are based on feeling, rather than rational insight or evidence, can be applied to the theoretical domain as well.53 _{In the same year that he wrote this letter, Hume moved}

to La Flèche in France and wrote his first book, A Treatise of Human Nature. It is interesting to note that La Flèche is where Descartes had studied in the previous century.

Hume returned in 1737 and published the Treatise subsequently. It was not a success. He writes, ‘Never literary attempt was more unfortunate than my

“Treatise of Human Nature”. It fell dead-born from the press, without reaching such distinction, as even to excite a murmur among the zealots.’ It did not take, however, a long time for Hume to recover from the disappointment. ‘[B]eing naturally of a cheerful and sanguine temper, I very soon recov- ered the blow, and prosecuted with great ardor my studies in the country.’54

Ironically, the Treatise is today regarded as one of the best philosophy books written originally in English. The following two volumes, Essays: Moral and

Political, were more successful than the Treatise but did not help him to secure

a chair at the University of Edinburgh in 1745. Ministers at Edinburgh blocked the appointment, claiming that Hume was an atheist.

Hume revised and expanded the ideas presented in the Treatise and published them in two volumes: An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding and An Enquiry

Concerning the Principles of Morals. Ironically, however, what attracted people’s

attention to him most was not these philosophical works but his other book project: The History of England. This work consists of a massive six volumes, tota- ling over a million words, which took Hume 15 years to complete.

Hume was never married and lived many years as a tutor, a librarian, and a diplomat. In addition to finding no position at the University of Edinburgh, Hume was rejected in his application to be appointed to a chair at the University of Glasgow. However, he achieved fame and wealth towards the end of his life. The Scottish author and lawyer James Boswell visited Hume near his death and managed to have the last interview with him. As Boswell describes him, ‘[Hume] was lean, ghastly, and quite of an earthy appearance … He was quite different from the plump figure he used to present … He seemed to be placid and even cheerful. He said he was just approaching to his end.’ Boswell wondered and asked Hume if he would reject the possibility of an afterlife even with the prospect of death before his eyes. Hume’s answer was that while it is ‘possible that a piece of coal put upon the fire would not burn’ it is ‘a most unreasonable fancy that we should exist for ever’. Boswell also asked Hume if the thought of annihila- tion never gave him any uneasiness. Hume responded, ‘not the least; no more than the thought that [I] had not been’. Boswell continued, ‘Well, Mr Hume, I hope to triumph over you when I meet you in a future state; and remember you are not to pretend that you was joking with all this infi- delity.’ ‘No, no’, said Hume. ‘But I shall have been so long there before you come that it will be nothing new.’55 _{Hume died in 1776 at the age of 65.}

It is difficult to know exactly which objections to the design argument Hume actually endorses because in his Dialogues they are all formulated,

defended, and criticized in dialogues among fictional characters. In fact it is likely that Hume introduced the objections in this way on purpose. He did not want to criticize arguments for the existence of God openly because to do so would likely have been regarded as blasphemous. Attributing criti- cisms of the arguments to a fictional character was a convenient way to avoid trouble. To be even more careful, the publisher of the Dialogues did not reveal his own or the author’s identity.

In what follows we consider objections that are derived from or inspired by Hume’s Dialogues. For the sake of simplicity, they will be presented as if they are Hume’s own objections. However, whether Hume really subscribes to precisely the same objections remains controversial. Also, for the sake of simplicity, the objections are presented as if they have in mind mainly Paley’s design argument in Natural Theology. It should be noted, however, that Hume’s Dialogues preceded Natural Theology. Hume started writing the Dialogues in 1750 but did not finish until 1776, the year he died. They were published posthumously in 1779, which is more than 20 years before Paley’s Natural

Theology was published. Dialogues, however, strongly anticipates Paley’s argu-

ment. Many atheists believe that Hume’s objections defeat Paley’s as well as many other versions of the design argument.