Rational Agnostic
Well-Known Member
It seems to me that nearly all arguments for the existence of God commit the fallacy of composition. One obvious example is the cosmological argument which is typically framed as:
"All components of the universe are contingent; therefore the universe must be contingent" or "The law of causality applies to the components of the universe, therefore it applies to the universe itself, and the universe had a cause."
Other arguments, such as the argument from design or fine-tuning argument also seem to boil down to this, as they are typically stated as:
"Since components of the universe that show characteristics of fine-tuning (computers, cars, etc.) were fine-tuned by an intelligent designer, then since the universe shows characteristics of fine-tuning, it must have been fine-tuned by an intelligent designer."
All of these arguments commit the fallacy of composition, that is, the erroneous assumption that the whole universe which consists of the sum of all the parts of the universe must have the same properties as each individual part. To illustrate the fallacy, consider a fallacious argument constructed using the same faulty reasoning (Bertrand Russell used this to illustrate his opponent's error in a debate on the existence of God):
"Every human has a mother, therefore, the human race must have a mother."
Obviously this is a false statement, because we can't assume that the sum of all humans (the human race) has the same properties as each component (individual humans). In the same way, we can't assume that the universe has the same properties or behavior as individual parts of the universe.
It seems to me that the majority of the classic arguments for the existence of God commit this fallacy in some way.
"All components of the universe are contingent; therefore the universe must be contingent" or "The law of causality applies to the components of the universe, therefore it applies to the universe itself, and the universe had a cause."
Other arguments, such as the argument from design or fine-tuning argument also seem to boil down to this, as they are typically stated as:
"Since components of the universe that show characteristics of fine-tuning (computers, cars, etc.) were fine-tuned by an intelligent designer, then since the universe shows characteristics of fine-tuning, it must have been fine-tuned by an intelligent designer."
All of these arguments commit the fallacy of composition, that is, the erroneous assumption that the whole universe which consists of the sum of all the parts of the universe must have the same properties as each individual part. To illustrate the fallacy, consider a fallacious argument constructed using the same faulty reasoning (Bertrand Russell used this to illustrate his opponent's error in a debate on the existence of God):
"Every human has a mother, therefore, the human race must have a mother."
Obviously this is a false statement, because we can't assume that the sum of all humans (the human race) has the same properties as each component (individual humans). In the same way, we can't assume that the universe has the same properties or behavior as individual parts of the universe.
It seems to me that the majority of the classic arguments for the existence of God commit this fallacy in some way.