The Role and Foundations for Knowledge

Written by Michael Black

In David Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, both Philo and Cleanthes build their proofs of the existence of God on human experience. Although their arguments are very similar in relying on human reason, there is a fundamental difference between the two. Cleanthes comes to his conclusions using abstract reasoning while Philo presents an argument that is based on common sense. Philo provides a more convincing argument for the existence of God than Cleanthes because he provides examples using common human experiences, while many of Cleanthes' examples are far-removed from everyday life and require inferences which go beyond everyday experience.

Cleanthes builds his proof for the existence of God around the argument that everything comes from design. Philo and Cleanthes agree that the design argument needs to be backed by human experience, however, they do not agree on how closely it needs to be related to human experience. Cleanthes' technique of reasoning lacks a needed relation to human experience. Cleanthes bases part of his proof for the existence of God on his example of an "articulate voice" being "heard from the clouds" (23). Supposing that this voice contained a sense and meaning and also conveyed instruction worthy of a benevolent Being superior to mankind, Cleanthes feels that this voice can only be ascribed to design or purpose. This is not a sound example to help prove the existence of God because there is no evidence that a universal voice has ever existed or ever will. It is hard to relate an "assumed" voice to human experience because no one has ever actually experienced it, and without experience, there is no way to know that it truly exists.

Page 1 of The Role and Foundations for Knowledge
Page 2 of The Role and Foundations for Knowledge
Page 3 of The Role and Foundations for Knowledge