proof arguments

• It could be argued that a proof would need to be a priori
• inductive arguments deal in probabilities rather than proofs
• Gerry J. Hughes has argued that as well as the proofs we use in logic and maths, for example, we do accept other kinds of proof based on what we can reasonably conclude about the real world.
• Hughes

  For example, we have no direct observational evidence that quarks exist, since no one has seen an isolated quark, yet the indirect evidence for their existence is so overwhelming that it can be considered to be a proof.
• For believers today, the third way could give the support of reason and philosophy to what they already believe through faith. For someone who is convinced by faith that God exists, the third way supports this by offering a reasoned proof that God must exist as a necessary being.
• In a deductive argument, if the premises are true, then the truth of the conclusion is guaranteed.
• For most scholars, Kant’s objections show that the argument is not a proof: it merely shows that ‘if’ God exists, then he exists necessarily.
• in a court case, jurors are only required to be certain ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ so often suspects will be convicted without 100% certainty.
• Hume sun example for inductive

  One classic example is that I have observed that the sun rises every morning, so I conclude that it will rise tomorrow morning as well.

  o However, it is not absolutely certain that the sun will rise tomorrow.
• Inductive arguments reach conclusions which are statements of probability rather than conclusive proofs. Although much of science is based on inductive arguments, the premises of the arguments do not logically mean that the conclusions are necessarily true.
• Paley’s design argument is an argument by analogy.

  It argues that since two things (watch and world) are alike in some ways, they will probably be alike in others.

  · Because the two things are only similar rather than the same, conclusions that one will be like the other are not 100% certain proofs.
• It is worth considering that some people treat the Design Argument as telling us about a God who is already believed in, rather than attempting to prove He exists in the first place. The argument could be seen as informative rather than demonstrative.