Assess whether 'God exists' is a testable hypothesis.

Authors Avatar

Assess whether 'God exists' is a testable hypothesis

Ultimately, God’s existence cannot be classified as a ‘testable’ hypothesis. A hypothesis is a proposal, which can be tested and then either confirmed or rejected. God’s non-physical state makes this virtually impossible, as we are unable to use our senses to confirm his presence or absence. Anthony Flew  and  Ludwig Wittgenstein’s theories provide a considerable amount of evidence, which suggests that there cannot possibly be a religious hypothesis. Good introduction.

Firstly, Anthony Flew’s parable of the gardener is highly vital in the quest to prove that God’s existence is not a testable hypothesis. The scenario includes two explorers, who discover a humanly made clearing, yet evidence suggests that it occurred naturally. Both explorers have contrasting views, one favours natural causes and the other favours human intervention. Subsequently, no evidence of the gardener is present, however is invisible. Flew’s claim hinges on falsification,and if a religious claim cannot be falsified it is essentially meaningless, as the claimant hasn’t allowed themselves to be proven wrong. The hypothesis of God’s existence is relatively similar to this case, as God is ‘transcendent’ and beyond our experiences, which by Flew’s logic makes the religious hypothesis meaningless, as it is not testable. Good.

William Paley’s ‘watchmaker analogy’ is instrumental in the argument for the claim that God’s existence is a testable hypothesis. Paley’s analogy consists of a watch, which possesses parts, which ultimately fulfils a purpose. Paley’s bold claims are plausible, as he likens the watch to the universe. Evidently, a watch’s sole purpose is to tell the time. Therefore, there must be a watchmaker. This links together with the human analogy, which implies that human beings must have a creator, who is in this case God. Essentially, Paley’s view is that due to the complexity and order of the universe, it is a requirement that a supremely intelligent being must exist. That being is supposedly God. Critics would say that this is far from the truth, and that we have not empirically witnessed the presence of God and it is safe to presume that we will never be able. Therefore, we can assume that God’s existence cannot be likened to that of a watch, because the process of making a watch is a testable hypothesis, whether the creation of the world is not and never will be. Good use of the analogy.

Join now!

Flew argues that religious believers hold onto God’s existence regardless of any evidence brought forward to suggest otherwise. Subsequently, Flew’s proposal is that the religious hypothesis must be rejected, due to the unfalsifiable nature and the undying support by religious believers, who are unable to allow their religious beliefs to be deemed meaningless. However, Flew’s approach is not widely accepted, and Basil Mitchell is one of many, who expressed their criticisms. Mitchell disagrees with Flew’s view that religious beliefs are unfalsifiable. Mitchell suggests that when religious believers encounter suffering such as evil, they are bound to question their faith, ...

This is a preview of the whole essay