Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion

Dialogues
Concerning
Natural Religion
Study Guide by Course Hero
an atheist (though what he believed is unknown) has since

What's Inside been both lauded and despised for his writings. Hume's body
of work has had an enormous influence on Western culture,
particularly in the fields of philosophy and theology. Urged by
j Book Basics ................................................................................................. 1 his friends to avoid controversy, Hume did not publish the
Dialogues while he was alive. They were first published in 1779,
a Main Ideas ................................................................................................... 2
three years after Hume died. The Dialogues discusses the
d In Context .................................................................................................... 3 extent to which a belief in God can be justified by different
methods of reasoning. The concept of God under discussion is
a Author Biography ..................................................................................... 4 specifically the idea of a wholly perfect being—a deity who has
every good quality to the maximum extent and no bad qualities.
h Key Figures ................................................................................................. 5
Primarily, the Dialogues' characters discuss a teleological
argument in favor of God's existence: that is, an argument that
k Plot Summary ............................................................................................. 8
states that the natural world is similar in relevant ways to art
c Part Summaries ...................................................................................... 10 and machines made by humans and, therefore, must be
purposefully created as art and machines are. One character,
g Quotes ........................................................................................................ 23 Philo, points out that the similarity between nature and
machines is not strong enough to conclude that a wholly
m Glossary ..................................................................................................... 25
perfect divine being exists. Teleological arguments under the
terminology intelligent design gained popularity again in the
20th century. The term intelligent design describes an
j Book Basics argument that biological creatures were produced in their

current structures by an "intelligent designer." Hume's
Dialogues remains an important yardstick for what such
AUTHOR
arguments must do—and what they must not do—to be
David Hume
successful.
YEAR PUBLISHED
PERSPECTIVE AND NARRATOR
1779
In Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, the fictional
character Pamphilus narrates, mainly in the third person, a past
GENRE
conversation he recalls among the three main fictional
Argument, Philosophy
characters—Philo, Cleanthes, and Demea.
AT A GLANCE
ABOUT THE TITLE
In his book Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion skeptical
The title, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, describes
Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711–76) takes on religious
both the content and the format of the work. A dialogue is a
orthodoxy, which he perceived to be dogmatic, superstitious,
record of a conversation among multiple participants, written
and harmful, as a means to argue that the nature of God is an
much like the script of a play. The subject matter—natural
unsolvable mystery that cannot be unlocked through deductive
religion—is a view about the existence of God, stating either of
reasoning. Hume, who was stigmatized during his life for being
two things: 1) that divinity is a part of nature rather than apart
Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Study Guide Main Ideas 2
from nature, and 2) that divinity is known by reason rather than machines are complex to the point that they require ample
by revelation—or by both. Scottish philosopher David Hume's planning, it does not follow that there is a morally perfect and
(1711–76) dialogue provides a compelling treatise against the immortal designer of the complicated natural formations,
influential teleological argument of the time, which claimed that scenic views, and creatures that occur naturally in the world.
the world was purposely created by design for the existence of Philo's point is that the best an argument from analogy could
God. secure is that complicated natural objects were designed by a
being intelligent and morally good to the extent that humans
are intelligent and good. However, this falls far short of the
God whom Cleanthes and Demea aim to prove exists. These
a Main Ideas two, and all the thinkers for whom Hume has them speaking,
reason too hastily and should take more care.
Analogical Reasoning Must Be The Doctrines of Theology and

Employed Carefully Organized Religion are
Cleanthes, Demea, and Philo spend most of the Dialogues
disputing whether it is possible to reason from human
Unsupportable
experience to the nature and existence of God by way of
In the course of the Dialogues Hume has his characters
analogy. Philo argues that because God is unique, there is, by
discuss all three types of philosophical arguments for God's
definition, nothing like God—nothing analogous to God.
existence that have been put forward in addition to more
Because of the usual view of God as a being with every perfect
practical arguments in favor of religion. In every case these
quality, it is difficult to argue by analogy for God's existence
arguments are found wanting, and the Dialogues conclude with
and perfection. Philo argues that human experience, as
Philo claiming that the only thing that can be concluded is that
imperfect beings encountering imperfect entities and events,
there is some uncharacterized intelligence behind the order in
does not provide the basis for a strong analogical argument.
the universe.
Analogical reasoning works like this. Humans observe that
The primary subject of discussion between Demea, Cleanthes,
touching a species of colorful frog causes people to twitch,
and Philo is the teleological type of argument, represented by
wheeze, and faint. They know that certain spiders that inject
Cleanthes's position. Throughout the Dialogues Philo attacks
neurotoxins when they bite cause people to spasm, stop
the strength of Cleanthes's proposed analogy. Hume has his
breathing, and die. Hence, they reason that because of the
characters spend most of their time on this argument because
similarity of the effects that the colorful frog also secretes a
it is the only one that is based on observation and experience.
neurotoxin. However, because twitching, wheezing, and
Being an empiricist, this kind of argument is the only one Hume
fainting are weakly similar to spasming, ceasing to breath, and
would consider as having the remotest chance of being able to
dying the argument from analogy that the colorful frogs
demonstrate that God exists. The other two forms of
secrete neurotoxins is weak. To strengthen the argument,
argument, the cosmological and ontological arguments, appear
contact with the frogs would need to cause people to spasm,
briefly and are quickly dismissed.
stop breathing, and die.
Hume did not even acknowledge the practical need for belief in
Likewise, Philo claims that because humans are notoriously
the specifically Christian God and Church doctrine surrounding
unfaithful, dishonest, intellectually limited, and prone to death,
that belief. He argues that the institution of the Church is
arguing by analogy that there must be a morally perfect and
harmful, and all its doctrines are absurd, "vulgar superstitions."
intelligent creator is a weak argument. Humans' limited
capacity for moral and intellectual good is only weakly similar
to the purported perfection of the being Cleanthes and Demea
argue for. Hence, while human buildings, artwork, and
Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Study Guide In Context 3
Pessimism and the Problem of Philosophical Dialogues

Evil Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion is written differently
from David Hume's other works. While the bulk of his work
Hume's characters in the Dialogues spend a great deal of takes the form of essays in which he directly addresses the
breath describing how life is filled with misery and suffering. subject matter as an author, Dialogues Concerning Natural
Part of the critique of Cleanthes's argument from design is Religion includes several fictional characters who address the
that, if the universe is like a house created by God, it is a poorly topic from their own perspectives.
designed house in which the inhabitants never rest peacefully.
Philo directly states the "problem of evil" in Part 10, an The dialogue format of philosophical inquiry goes back to the
argument that is meant to demonstrate that a perfectly perfect Greek philosopher Plato (428/427–348/347 BCE), who used
God does not exist. the format to put forward his own views and those of his
teacher, the Greek philosopher Socrates (c.470–399 BCE).
If there were a perfect God of the sort posited by Christianity, Plato's dialogues would depict Socrates in conversation with
it would be both omnipotent and omnibenevolent. That is, God one or more of his fellow Greeks discussing diverse
would be all-powerful, thus able to prevent any evil, and all- philosophical topics. For example, the Euthyphro (written 380
good, thus desiring to prevent all evil. Though Hume doesn't BCE) dialogue depicts a scene in Athens where Socrates
have Philo mention it, most formulations of the problem of evil meets the titular Euthyphro when both are headed to court.
also add that a perfect God would be omniscient. That is, God Upon hearing that Euthyphro is trying his father for the murder
would be all-knowing, thus aware of all evil. If God is aware of of a worker who murdered a slave, Socrates asks Euthyphro
all evil, wants to prevent it, and is able to prevent it, then the questions about the nature of piety.
world should be free of evil. However, there is evil in the world:
earthquakes and disease afflict humanity through no fault of its In the beginning of Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural
own, and humans maim and murder each other with regularity. Religion, Pamphilus says to his friend Hermippus that this form
According to the argument, these factors necessitate that God of philosophical writing fell into disuse after the time of Plato.
must lack one of the perfections listed above. Therefore, God However, another British empiricist (someone who relies on
is not perfect. For Hume, the conclusion that God is not observation and experience) had also taken up the dialogue
perfect does not license the conclusion that there are no divine form before Hume, namely George Berkeley (1685–1753). In his
beings at all—just none that answer to the description of the Three Dialogues Between Hylas and Philonous (1713), Berkeley
God of Christianity. portrays his metaphysical idealism (idea that reality is a mental
rather than a material construct) as the philosophical theory
Still, even if Hume would concede that some kind of intelligent, that most aligns with common sense. Hume's object is similar
divine being exists, he still has a pessimistic view of human in the Dialogues. He wishes to show that a commonsense sort
existence. On balance, he believes that there is more bad in of empiricism is the best way to approach the topic of religion
the universe than good. The description of mental anguishes and that this approach does not support anything like the
Hume puts into Demea's mouth paints a picture of human mainstream Christian version of religion.
beings that would be miserable even if no external forces
harangued them.
The Enlightenment
d In Context Toward the end of the 17th century, the intellectual movement
known as the Enlightenment became predominant in England
and in Europe, especially France. The Enlightenment placed a
premium on rationalism, moderation, order, decorum, and the
diffusion of knowledge. Scientific research displaced
superstition and, to some degree, religious beliefs. The
philosophers of the Enlightenment stressed exploration and

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Study Guide Author Biography 4
experience as touchstones for the acquisition and evaluation something people are born with. George Berkeley (1685–1753),
of knowledge. Irish philosopher and Anglican Bishop of Cloyne, was also a
significant empiricist—the second of the three so-called British
In Scotland the hub of Enlightenment thinking was in empiricists, after Locke and before Hume. According to
Edinburgh. The numerous figures of the Scottish Berkeley, knowledge is limited to ideas, which are equivalent to
Enlightenment met socially to dispute and discuss their ideas. sensations, passions, and memory. There is nothing to infer
Philosophers were the leading figures of this intellectual beyond or apart from these ideas, so an object just is the idea
dynamic in Scotland, David Hume prominent among them. In one has of it. An apple, for example, is the collection of
addition to Hume there were several important Scottish sensations associated with it: this smoothness, this firmness,
philosophers: Adam Smith (1723–90), who was a friend of this color, this crunchiness, and so forth. There simply is no
Hume; Thomas Reid (1710–96), whose body of work mainly proof, Berkeley argues, for the view that there is any mind-
criticized Hume; and philosopher Dugald Stewart (1753–1828), independent reality. Consequently, "esse est percipi," that is,
a student of Thomas Reid. Though these four philosophers' "to be is to be perceived."
theories of reality, human nature, and morality did not always
align, their collective contributions to the field of philosophy led In Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion the empiricist
to Edinburgh being referred to as "a hotbed of genius" among viewpoint is asserted firmly by the character Cleanthes. His
their peers. view is that there is nothing about the world—about what
exists—that can be known from anything but experience. He
One plank of Scottish Enlightenment philosophy was a focus presses a teleological form of argument for the existence of
on experience, or empiricism, rather than pure reason, as the God, that is, a type of argument that uses observations of
primary and best route to gaining knowledge. Intellectuals in order and purpose in nature to conclude that God exists. The
continental Europe pursued a rationalist methodology, that is, teleological argument Cleanthes gives for the existence and
the idea that knowledge could be deduced from fundamental nature of God stakes its claim on the observed resemblance of
philosophical principles without much recourse to actual animals, geological formations, and the like to human creations
human experience. Opposed to this idea, the English and of art, architecture, and machinery. Teleological arguments,
Scottish philosophers, Hume among them, insisted upon the because they rely on experience and observation, are a
primacy of human experience. posteriori arguments. They draw conclusions after (posterior
to) experience. Distinct from these arguments are the a priori
arguments given by Demea. His arguments are a priori
British Empiricism because they draw conclusions before (prior to) experience,
based on logical reasoning alone. Cleathes critiques Demea's a
The view that experience is the fundamental and best way to priori argument as being able to prove exactly nothing about
knowledge is called empiricism. Philosophers starting in the world and what exists in it. The disagreement between
antiquity espoused empiricist views. The Sophists, Stoics, and Cleanthes and Demea represents the clash between
Epicurean schools of philosophy in ancient Greece all stressed empiricism and rationalism—the latter being the idea that
the importance of experience in gaining knowledge. In the knowledge can be gained without relying on experience and
British Isles empiricism began to take root with Roger Bacon observation.
(c.1220–92), William of Ockham (c.1285–1347/49), and Francis
Bacon (1561–1626). However, the thinkers who are given the
label British empiricist start later in the 17th century with
English philosopher John Locke (1632–1704).
a Author Biography
John Locke's work in epistemology and political philosophy
profoundly influenced Enlightenment thinkers, and the effects Youth and Education
of this influence have continued over time. As an empiricist,
Locke was concerned to show how knowledge is derived from
David Hume was born on May 7, 1711, in Edinburgh, Scotland.
experience. In his An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
His father, Joseph Hume, was lord of a small estate, and his
(1689), he argues against the view that ideas are innate, or
mother, Catherine, was the daughter of a knight. Joseph Hume

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Study Guide Key Figures 5
died when David was only three. England in 1766 to ensure his safety from persecution. Once in
England, however, Rousseau suspected a plot against him and
At age 12, Hume entered the University of Edinburgh, leaving fled back to France. Later that same year Hume published an
when he was about 14 or 15. His youthful university experience explanation for the dispute with Rousseau.
was not unusual at the time. Hume later went on to study law,
as was the family custom, but the law failed to capture his
interest. He was, however, passionate about learning and read
widely, both while in school and after he left. So engrossed
Retirement and Death
was he in his studies that he succumbed to a nervous
Hume subsequently became undersecretary of state, and then,
breakdown in 1729.
in 1769, he retired from public life. Back in Edinburgh, Hume
continued writing. He spent time with friends, including
Scottish social philosopher and author of The Wealth of
Professional Life and Nations (1776), Adam Smith (1723–90). Among the works he
completed was an autobiography that was published
Publications posthumously. Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779)
was also published posthumously because of concern from
After recovering, Hume worked in a merchant's office before Hume's friends that its critique of theism and the widely
retiring to France to write full time. The product of his efforts accepted arguments in favor of belief in God would bring
was the monumental A Treatise of Human Nature (1739–40). Hume more of the negative attention that had frustrated his
The book was not well received, and though Hume later attempts to obtain earlier teaching positions and caused some
considered this early work to be immature, he was of his works to be banned by the church.
disappointed at the time, famously writing that the Treatise "fell
dead-born from the press." He kept writing, however, and Hume died on August 25, 1776, after a long illness. His
produced works that have continued to influence readers and influence as a writer has continued, from his work on the
thinkers. history of England to political, economic, moral, and
epistemological essays and books. Epistemological writings
Hume's professional life was varied. After the first two volumes are related to the study of the bounds and legitimacy of
of his second work, Essays, Moral and Political (1741–42), met knowledge. Indeed, it was none other than Hume whom
with some success, he attempted to secure an academic post German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) credited with
at the University of Edinburgh in 1744, but his effort was inspiring his revolutionary philosophical work, Critique of Pure
thwarted by local clergymen who, alarmed by Hume's apparent Reason (1781).
atheism, petitioned the local council to prevent it. In 1748 Hume
published a rewritten version of the first part of the Treatise,
h Key Figures
which he later revised again under its current title, An Enquiry
of Human Understanding (1758). He next rewrote the third
book of the Treatise as An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of
Morals (1751). In 1752 Hume became the keeper of the
Advocates Library at Edinburgh, and with access to the vast Cleanthes
library, turned to historical writing. The works he produced
during this time, Political Discourses (1752) and History of While Cleanthes has his empiricism in common with Hume, he
England, which was published in six quarto volumes between does not ultimately represent Hume's own views on the subject
1754 and 1762, brought him international fame. He published of religion. The sort of teleological argument that Cleanthes
Four Dissertations in 1757 in which he rewrote the second part puts forward is just the sort of overextension of human
of the Treatise. In 1763 he moved to Paris and worked as a reasoning that Philo disputes.
secretary to the British Embassy. He was warmly received in
Parisian intellectual circles, where he met and interacted with a
number of luminaries, including Swiss-born French philosopher
Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–78), whom he brought back to

Demea
Where Cleanthes serves as the speaker for teleological
arguments for God's existence, Demea represents the
cosmological and ontological arguments. Demea becomes
disturbed by Philo's views when he begins to realize that Philo
likely doesn't believe in God at all.
Philo
Philo is the most likely candidate for Hume's mouthpiece in the
Dialogues. Philo presents a consistently anti-religious view
throughout the work. He presses the point that humans in
general, and their reasoning powers in particular, are limited.
Because of these limitations he claims that there is no way to
hold a well-justified belief about either the existence or nature
of God.
Pamphilus
Pamphilus recounts the conversation among Cleanthes,
Demea, and Philo to his friend Hermippus. Throughout the
Dialogues, Pamphilus says rather little. However, in the closing
lines of the work he indicates his preference for the arguments
of his guardian, Cleanthes. Little is said about Cleanthes'
relationship to Pamphilus. There is a brief indication in Part 1
that Cleanthes was a friend of Pamphilus's father, who may be
dead. Philo remarks how kind it was of Cleanthes to treat
Pamphilus as his own son.

Full Key Figure List Aristotle (384–322 BCE), an ancient

Greek philosopher and scientist, is
considered the founder of formal logic.
His concepts have become an integral
Key Figure Description
Aristotle part of Western culture. Hume refers to
Aristotle's concept of the "unmoved
Cleanthes is one of the three mover," that is, that whatever caused
participants in the Dialogue and argues the universe to come into being cannot
Cleanthes for a thoroughgoing empiricism about have been caused by anything else.
everything, including the existence and
nature of God.
Audaeus was a 4th-century church
reformer in Syria who was expelled
Demea is one of the three participants from the church for his idea that God is
Audaeus
in the Dialogue and represents the human-like. Philo argues vehemently
Demea against this idea, accusing Cleanthes of
most traditional philosophical and
theological views among them. being an "anthropomorphite."
Philo is one of the three participants in French mathematician and philosopher

the Dialogue and vigorously presses René Descartes (1596–1650) was a
Philo René skeptic, like Hume. However, Hume
objections to the views of both
Cleanthes and Demea. Descartes sought a more moderate version of
skepticism and was critical of
Descartes.
Pamphilus is the narrator of the
Pamphilus Dialogues. He is the student and ward
of Cleanthes. Epicurus (341–270 BCE) was a Greek
philosopher famed for his version of
hedonist ethical philosophy, the goal of
Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 BCE–43 Epicurus
which was to achieve mental tranquility.
BCE), often referred to as Tully, was a Hume's characters ridicule Epicurus's
Roman orator, statesman, and belief that matter is infinite.
philosopher known for his support of
the Roman Republic in its last days
Marcus Tullius Hermippus, who has no lines in the
before the rule of the first Roman
Cicero Dialogues, is a friend of Pamphilus.
emperor. Cicero is mentioned in Part 5,
for his criticism of one of Plato's Hermippus Hermippus is being told about the
theories. Philo uses Cicero's argument conversation among Cleanthes, Demea,
to refute Cleanthes's anthropomorphic and Philo by Pamphilus.
ideas about God.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716),
St. Thomas Aquinas (1224/25–1274), German philosopher and
Italian theologian and philosopher, mathematician, argued that God
utilized Aristotelian logic in his major Gottfried created the best of all possible worlds
works. He is recognized by the Roman Wilhelm and that people are more good than
St. Thomas Leibniz evil, more happy than miserable. In the
Catholic Church as one of the foremost
Aquinas Dialogues, his ideas are brought up but
Western influences on Church doctrine.
The main proponents for the then readily dismissed by Cleanthes,
arguments for intelligent design spring Philo, and Demea.
from Aquinas's theories.
Ancient Greek philosopher Leucippus is
the original founder of atomism, which
is the theory that atoms come together
Leucippus to form groups while traveling through
the void that is the universe. Demea,
Cleanthes, and Philo discuss the theory
in Part 8 of the Dialogues.

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Study Guide Plot Summary 8
"Of Miracles." Hume's reputation as an unbeliever, and what if

Nicolas Malebranche (1638–1715) was a
French philosopher who wrote any measures he took to obscure his beliefs, are discussed. It's
prolifically across ethics, metaphysics, concluded that the character Philo likely presents Hume's
Nicolas
and theology. He is referred to in the actual views given that Hume elected to publish Dialogues
Malebranche
Dialogues for having said that nothing
Concerning Natural Religion posthumously and unchanged
should be said about God except that
God is perfect. from his original manuscript.
John Stuart Mill (1806–73) was an

John Stuart
Mill
English philosopher and mathematician
whose writings provide a basis for how
Parts 1 and 2
to strengthen analogical arguments.
Pamphilus tells his friend Hermippus that he is retelling a
conversation between Demea, Cleanthes, and Philo. Demea
William Paley (1743–1805), British
philosopher and priest, was famous for and Philo begin by discussing when is the appropriate time to
his teleological argument theories; his start religious instruction for children. They agree that teaching
works were required reading at
religion as a scientific study should be put off until last in a
Cambridge for many years. His analogy
William Paley person's education after they have been shown the limitations
of the watch—that if someone stumbled
upon a watch in a forest, they would of human reason and observation. This discussion occasions a
assume someone made the watch— conversation about skepticism, which all three men agree
became the basis for intelligent design
theory. cannot be a serious and final philosophical position. After
discussing skepticism, they begin their main discussion about
Plato (428/427–348/347 BCE) is an whether it is possible to prove God's existence by arguing from
ancient Greek philosopher whose analogy with the appearance of design in nature. Philo doubts
theory of forms posits that there is an the usefulness of Cleanthes's analogical argument.
unseen world of objects and concepts
Plato that this world mirrors. Hume's dialogue
format is taken from a tradition started
by Plato in which he depicts his
teacher, Socrates (470–399), in
Parts 3, 4, and 5
philosophical conversations.
Cleanthes defends his analogy and accuses Philo of creating
Richard H. Popkin (b. 1923) wrote the foolish objections. The three men discuss whether
introduction to the Hackett Publishing anthropomorphic views of God are either plausible or profane.
Richard H.
Company edition used for this guide. Cleanthes digs in regarding his anthropomorphism and
Popkin
He is a professor of philosophy and
condemns other types of arguments for the existence of God
author of several books.
as being incomprehensible mysticism. He argues that nature
resembles human-made objects enough to warrant the
Ancient Greek philosopher Pyrrhon of
Pyrrhon of Elis Elis (c. 360– c. 272) is considered to be inference that natural objects must also be made by a human-
the father of skepticism. like, albeit superior, intelligence. Philo objects, arguing that
Cleanthes' arguments could only possibly establish the
existence of a deeply flawed creator—one who would not at all
resemble the God of Christianity.
k Plot Summary
Parts 6, 7, and 8
Introduction
Demea, Cleanthes, and Philo discuss several alternative views
The editor discusses David Hume's views regarding of the creation of the universe, and whether they are the more
Christianity and religion by way of several of his works, plausible conclusions of the kind of analogical argument that
including two essays appearing in the volume: "On Suicide" and Cleanthes is attempting to make. Rather than the world

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Study Guide Plot Summary 9
resembling a human-made machine, they discuss whether it

might more resemble an animal, plant, or randomly agitated
pool of matter. Demea and Cleanthes comment that these
theories have nothing to support them, to which Philo replies
that neither does Cleanthes's preferred theory.
Parts 9 and 10
Demea wonders whether the problem is the a posteriori nature
of Cleanthes's argument and suggests that a priori arguments
are neater and have fewer problems. Cleanthes remarks that
the sort of argument that Demea suggests is meaningless
nonsense. Philo agrees and says that arguments are not
generally the best way to persuade people to religion in the
first place. Demea concedes Philo's point and notes that the
best way to move people to religion is to appeal to their
emotions. Philo and Demea discuss the general misery and
suffering that characterizes human existence, which they
maintain against Cleanthes's objections.
Parts 11 and 12
The three men return to discussing Cleanthes's analogy-based
argument for the existence of God. Cleanthes and Philo
discuss the possibility that an imperfect creator would be a
satisfactory conclusion. Demea is aghast and accuses Philo of
being a worse skeptic and unbeliever than Cleanthes, and then
departs. Philo and Cleanthes continue their discussion, turning
to the general usefulness of religion as an institution. Philo
claims that it is universally destructive and problematic,
whereas Cleanthes replies that even for all its flaws, it is a
good thing. Philo comments that the only reasonable
conclusion about religion is that there is some sort of
intelligence that has organized the universe. None of the
dogma of organized religion can be sustained. The final line
has Pamphilus comment that he believes Cleanthes's
reasoning to be the closest to the truth.

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Study Guide Part Summaries 10
Hume's views led to some of his work, including the Dialogues,

c Part Summaries to be published posthumously. His attacks on providing a
rationalist or empiricist support for mainstream, established
religion were contrary to the intellectual trends of his time, and
Introduction they were not received well within society in general, which
was still predominantly Christian. However, some scholars
have noted that Hume's work unintentionally helped traditional
religion flourish by preventing newer, revisionary religious
Summary viewpoints from being established.
The editor, Richard H. Popkin, gives a partial biography of

David Hume. Primarily, he discusses several of Hume's works Analysis
and their relation to his long-standing influence and reputation.
One of the most notable features of Hume's works is their Popkin argues that Philo most likely represents Hume's own
consistent criticism of religion and its doctrines. "Of Miracles" view. To explain away some of Philo's comments in the last
and "Of a Particular Providence and of a Future State" both section it is important to note that (as Popkin points out)
critique the central beliefs of Christian doctrine that there are Hume's Dialogues were modeled on Marcus Tullius Cicero's De
miraculous occurrences and that God has a plan leading to a Natura Deorum (On the Nature of the Gods). As Cicero's text
perfected world in the future. However, in Dialogues heavily employs verbally ironic expressions (expressions that
Concerning Natural Religion, every character seems to believe express the opposite of their literal, surface meaning), it is
in the existence of some sort of intelligent being who created reasonable to argue that Hume was also being ironic. Popkin
the universe—though they disagree on the exact nature of that suspects Hume's ironic tendencies when addressing the
being. These different facts make interpreting Dialogues "sprinkled fideistic remarks" throughout Hume's writings.
Concerning Natural Religion a complicated task. Popkin notes Fideism is the view that religious belief cannot be based on
that it is not clear how to square the discussion among the reason and evidence, but rather only on revelation and faith.
various characters as expressing Hume's views. Popkin points However, Popkin argues it would be too uncharitable to Hume
out that while Philo "employs a great many arguments from to say there are such blatant contradictions within and among
Hume's other philosophical works," the character declares that his various works. It is unreasonable to suspect that Hume
he does believe in God by the end of the Dialogues. Further the both believed that religious knowledge was to be revealed by
narrator, Pamphilus, explicitly endorses Cleanthes's arguments God and also that almost all religious knowledge was vulgar
in the last line of the Dialogues. superstition.
The solution to these interpretive difficulties, according to Hume had several extremely devoted friends, including famed
Popkin, lies in reading Hume's other works. Hume's The Natural philosopher and economist Adam Smith. Smith himself
History of Religion claims that no one can seriously "suspend confirmed that Hume maintained his antipathy toward religious
his belief for a moment with regard to the primary principles of belief generally, and Christianity specifically, to the day he died.
Theism." The key phrase here is "suspend his belief." In his An While Smith and Hume's other friends spoke warmly of him
Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding Hume notes that after his death and arranged for the publication of several that
there are many beliefs—such as that different events cause had been delayed, the greater public's antipathy for Hume did
each other—that humans are not able to suspend even though not abate after his death. Hume's grave in Old Catriona
they realize these beliefs cannot be conclusively proven by any Cemetery, Edinburgh, had to be guarded from vandals for a
philosophical means. Popkin concludes that Hume may have time after his death. Hence both popular reception of Hume's
viewed the belief in an intelligent creator as unavoidable and, work and studied critical analysis, agree that he was no friend
hence, the only tenet of an acceptable natural religion (i.e., of mainstream, organized religion. Thus, it is reasonable to
religious belief based on reason and evidence rather than conclude that Philo best represents Hume's own viewpoints in
revelation). Everything else was vulgar superstition to the Dialogues.
Hume—an opinion he maintained to the day of his death.

subject or the view that it is appropriate for a person to

Part 1 suspend judgment about all subjects. Disbelief and suspension
of judgment are distinguished from each other by philosophers.
To disbelieve something is to believe in its negation. Hence to
Summary disbelieve that it is raining is to believe that it is not raining.
Suspending judgment of something is to believe neither it nor
In a brief, unnumbered section prior to Part 1, Pamphilus its opposite. Consequently, to suspend judgment about the rain
explains to his friend Hermippus what he is writing. He is to believe neither that it is raining nor that it is not raining.
discusses the nature of dialogue as a philosophical writing
style and explains why the topic of natural religion is well Philosophers who argue that disbelief is the correct attitude to
suited to be explored through dialogue. Pamphilus then take toward claims of knowledge have historically been
explains that he will write the debate between Cleanthes, referred to as Academic skeptics, named after the Academy in
Demea, and Philo just as he heard it. ancient Athens where Plato lectured. Philosophers who argue
that suspension of judgment is the correct attitude to take
The discussion between Cleanthes, Demea, and Philo begins toward claims of knowledge have historically been referred to
on the topic of when it is appropriate to start religious as Pyrrhonian skeptics, named after 4th-century Greek
instruction for children. Demea favorably quotes ancient philosopher Pyrrhon of Elis. René Descartes's (1596–1650)
philosophers who said, "Students of philosophy ought first to famous skeptical arguments from his Meditations are an
learn logics, then ethics, next physics, [and] last ... nature of the example of Academic skepticism. The last person generally
gods." When Philo expresses surprise that Demea teaches his described as a pure Pyrrhonian skeptic is Greek philosopher
children religious principles so late in their lives, Demea replies Sextus Empiricus (fl. 3rd century), who articulates a trilemma in
that he meant specifically the scientific study of religion. which there are only three methods of obtaining justification
Demea assures Philo that he "season[s] their minds with early for beliefs, but all three methods ultimately fail to provide
piety." He adds that he also makes sure they know of the justification. Because no belief can be justified, all belief should
limitations, endless disagreements, and strange ideas that all be suspended.
those who dispute matters of science and philosophy are
subject to. The scorn of Demea, Cleanthes, and Philo toward skepticism
focuses mainly on the impossibility of applying and practicing
Philo approves of this perspective and proposes that it is skepticism in real-life circumstances since skepticism requires
appropriate to go a step further. People should be made aware someone to abandon common sense attitudes about the world.
of the "weakness, blindness, and narrow limits of human Cleanthes's comment toward Philo's apparent skepticism in
reason." Cleanthes remarks that Philo is proposing to base Part 1 is a jab specifically aimed at the Pyrrhonian version of
"religious faith on philosophical skepticism." The discussion skepticism. Cleanthes says, "[W]e shall see then whether you
then proceeds to how inconsistent people who claim to be go out the door or the window, and whether you really doubt
skeptics are. While they say they don't know or believe that your body has gravity or can be injured by its fall." Pyrrhon
anything, they still continue acting in commonsense ways. of Elis is reputed to have taken the principle of suspending
Cleanthes gives the example of exiting by way of a door or a belief to such extremes that he would ignore impending
window to see if a skeptic can "really doubt if [their] body has dangers. These stories are likely false and meant only to
gravity or can be injured by its fall." Cleanthes and Philo also ridicule Pyrrhon or, in contrast, point out his consistency.
note how sometimes skepticism has been seen as the path Cleanthes's statement insinuates that anyone who claims to
toward atheism, and sometimes a path toward belief in God. suspend judgment in such a way as to ignore the fact that they
will be harmed by jumping from a window is being dishonest. It
is not possible to believe something that is opposed to
Analysis common sense. The general tone of Part 1 is negative in its
treatment of philosophical skepticism. The tone is intended to
Skepticism has a long and varied history in Western underscore that philosophical skepticism is not a position that
philosophy. It is either the view that it is appropriate for a a person can genuinely believe. That the Pyrrhonian sort of
person to disbelieve that they have knowledge about any skepticism is psychologically impossible continues today to be

a criticism of its doctrine. that it is not appropriate to "affirm that the universe bears such
a resemblance to a house that we can ... infer a similar cause."
While Hume himself was an avowed skeptic, he was not a Cleanthes counters that many natural objects, for example,
skeptic of the Pyrrhonian variety. The sort of skepticism he human beings and their limbs, are so well suited for their
favored is revealed later, in Part 3, when Cleanthes says that a purposes that the conclusion that some great intelligence
reasonable skeptic "is only to reject abstruse, remote, and designs them is well justified. Demea despairs that Philo and
refined arguments." This viewpoint is more like Academic Cleanthes seem to be treating the existence of God as if it
skepticism in that it restricts the range of topics deemed were not a clear and indisputable fact. Philo replies that he is
appropriate for humanity's limited capacity. merely showing the weaknesses of the "analogical reasoning"
Cleanthes is using to form his argument. A proper analogical
argument requires observing many instances of close
Part 2 resemblances between what is being compared. However,
Philo argues, Cleanthes's examples do not have such
similarities and have not been observed frequently enough, if at
Summary all.
Demea begins by expressing surprise that Cleanthes thinks

Demea is attempting to defend the idea that God exists. "This, I Analysis
hope," Demea says, is not by any means a question among us."
Demea argues that the only real question up for dispute is The type of argument Cleanthes puts forward for the
what God's nature is, while the fact that God exists is self- existence of God is referred to as a teleological argument. The
evident. He quotes Nicolas Malebranche, who argued that name is derived from the Greek word telos, which means
there is nothing that should be said about God other than that "purpose" or "goal." The main idea behind teleological
God exists and is perfect. Demea says that people ought to arguments is that various objects and systems in the universe
"humble [themselves] in his august presence ... conscious of have precise functions and purposes as if they were
[their] frailties [and] adore in silence his infinite perfections." intentionally designed to complete specific tasks. In this way,
natural objects, such as plants and planets, resemble human-
Philo agrees with Demea, again, and then adds to Demea's made objects, such as, skyscrapers and submarines. Just as
claims. Addressing Cleanthes, Philo states that there is no human-made machines and buildings could not have come into
need to base religious faith on skepticism because, he says, existence without purpose and design, teleological arguments
"[o]ur ideas reach no further than our experience: We have no contend that plants and planets could not be the product of
experience of divine attributes and operations." Hence, there is random chance either. Cleanthes deploys this same sort of
no way to make a supportable claim about the nature of God. reasoning in Part 2. He compares all of nature to an exquisitely
Cleanthes disagrees and says that the nature of God—and designed machine with interlocking parts, of which the
God's similarity to human beings— can be established by seamless functioning provides strong evidence an intelligent
observing the similarity between the orderliness of nature and being intentionally created nature.
the orderliness of human art and engineering. Demea
disapproves of Cleanthes's arguments, complaining that it is Teleological arguments increased in prevalence and popularity
inappropriate to say that God resembles humans. He also just before and during David Hume's lifetime. The success of
complains about Cleanthes's argumentative method: "No scientific methods of inquiry, starting during the Enlightenment,
abstract arguments! No proofs a priori!" Demea warns that this provided significant ammunition for arguments that nature
error may give the appearance of an advantage to the atheist must have an intelligent designer. The teleological arguments
side of the dispute. of the 16th and 17th centuries stemmed from earlier work by
St. Thomas Aquinas, the 13th-century theologian, who argued
Philo and Cleanthes proceed to argue about whether there is that any object that progressed toward a clear and specific
enough resemblance between objects humans create and goal either itself possessed knowledge or was guided by an
objects in nature to conclude that natural objects must have a entity that possessed knowledge. As plants and animals lack
designer and creator like human-made objects do. Philo argues knowledge, the only remaining explanation for their purpose-

driven behavior is that some intelligent being guides their design arguments claim that the successful characteristics of
development. living creatures appear all at once, because of the handiwork
of an intelligent creator. One famous example of this argument,
The historical figures who put forward arguments exactly like due to Michael Behe, focuses on the cilium of protozoa. This
Cleanthes included English naturalist John Ray, English scholar small protrusion from a cell is used for the purposes of
and clergyman Richard Bentley, and English theologian William movement by protozoa. Behe argues that such a feature could
Derham. This form of argument is called the simple analogy not evolve all at once, and that any precursor to it has no
argument because it relies on the principle that like effects evolutionary function for cells. Because it has no evolutionary
have like causes. In the Dialogues Hume states this idea as, function, it would not be selected for in a natural selection
"[f]rom similar effects we infer similar causes." According to process. If it would not be selected for, then it would not exist
the argument, natural objects and human-made objects are to eventually become the functional and adaptive feature
both well-ordered and operate toward the fulfillment of a protozoa actually have. Behe reasons that such biological
specific goal. A sailboat moves across the sea by taking structures could not have arisen gradually as a result of
advantage of the wind to move humans across the earth. A unguided, random natural forces. Instead it must have been
dandelion seed moves across the land by taking advantage of intentionally "installed" by an intelligent creator.
the wind to spread dandelions across the land. These
examples are the "similar effects," both of which are known to
human observers. Only what causes sailboats to move can be
directly known by humans because people purposely designed
Part 3
sails to use the wind to move the boats across the seas.
Because the sailboat and the dandelion seed are similar in their
effects, proponents of the simple analogy argument would
Summary
reason that dandelions and sailboats must be similar in their
Cleanthes ridicules Philo's arguments about analogical
causes. Therefore, just as the sailboat was intentionally
reasoning. He complains that Philo would deny that it was
designed to do its work, so too must the dandelion seed have
appropriate to conclude a divine and intelligent source if "an
been intentionally designed. The crux of Part 2 centers on
articulate voice were in the clouds ... extended in the same
Philo refuting Cleanthes's examples, warning that analogies
instant over all nations" or if books were naturally occurring
made between natural objects are not always as apt as they
objects that still contained the same words and meaning as
may appear to be. Additionally, inferences drawn from these
human-made books. Then Cleanthes asserts that books are
analogies cannot always be applied under other
less complex than the bodies of animals, which "afford many
circumstances. Philo uses scientific examples to illustrate his
stronger instances of design." Cleanthes asks Philo if he could
point, and Philo adds emphasis to his main point by showing
open a book written in all of the intricacies required of "pure
outrage that Cleanthes would compare the universe to a
intellect" and continue to assert that the book did not proceed
house.
from thought and design. He continues, saying that Philo's
Teleological arguments, or arguments based on observing extravagance misrepresents the philosophical skeptics, who
order and design in nature, have remained popular and only "reject abstruse ... arguments ... [and] adhere to common
effective. So-called irreducible complexity arguments and sense." They don't reject every possible argument as being
intelligent design arguments have been set against evolution uncertain.
by natural selection arguments as explanations for the
Pamphilus notes that Philo seems to be embarrassed by
existence of complex biological features. Arguments that
Cleanthes retort, but Demea intercedes to make his own point.
appeal to irreducible complexity aim at showing that there are
He cautions against concluding too much from an example like
characteristics of living creatures that are too complicated to
Cleanthes's one of naturally occurring books. Books written by
have arisen slowly, over numerous generations. This picture of
humans are comprehensible to other human beings. Demea
gradual change is what the theory of evolution by natural
says that when he reads a book, he enters "into the mind and
selection draws, where competition for resources and mates
intention of the author." In a way, Demea says, he can become
determines which creatures, and hence which characteristics,
the author and discern what "revolved in [the author's]
survive into future generations. On the other hand, intelligent

imagination" while composing the book. However, repeating his Cleanthes imagines that a loud and articulate voice spoke all at
statement from earlier in the dialogue, Demea claims that no once from the sky to everyone in the world, giving them
human is in the position to know the mind of God. After likening meaningful and profound instructions. Cleanthes says Philo
nature to God's book, Demea says, "the volume of nature would focus on the fact that the voice was louder than any
contains a great and inexplicable riddle." There is always an human voice or the fact that the voice was meaningful in
amount of mystery about God, which explains why humans multiple languages simultaneously. On the basis of these
should be "pious and respectful" toward God. differences, Cleanthes sneers, Philo would say that the
conclusion that the voice had an intelligent source was based
on a weak analogy. Cleanthes claims that concluding that such
Analysis a voice did not have an intelligent source would be ludicrous.
Cleanthes's and Philo's back-and-forth about whether human This contrasting viewpoint between Philo and Cleanthes
experiences and observations of the natural world are shapes much of the remainder of the Dialogues. Philo points
sufficient basis for an analogical argument illustrate the out differences and claims that Cleanthes puts too much stock
trickiness of such arguments. Where in Part 2 Philo suggests in a narrow set of resemblances, while Cleanthes points out
that the analogy between the universe and a house is too resemblances and claims that Philo puts too much stock in a
weak, Cleanthes now counters that this reasoning leads Philo narrow set of differences.
into accepting absurd conclusions.
Philosophers have written much about how effective analogical Part 4

arguments work. Nineteenth-century English philosopher John
Stuart Mill gives a clear statement of what constitutes
"strength" for an analogy: every relevant resemblance between
two situations strengthens the basis for the conclusion of an
Summary
analogical argument. If an argument relies on only one instance
Responding to Demea, Cleanthes says, "[I]f our ideas ... be not
of relevant similarity between two things, then the analogy is
... correspondent to ... [God's] real nature," then there isn't
weak and the conclusion improbable. For each further, distinct,
anything "in this subject worth insisting on." Cleanthes adds
and relevant resemblance between two things the analogy
that he does not see the difference between atheists and
becomes stronger and the conclusion more probable. The
"mystics" who maintain that God is an "unknown and
corollary of this is that for each relevant non-resemblance
unintelligible" mystery. Demea complains that Cleanthes is
(disanology) the analogy becomes weaker and the conclusion
arguing by calling people names rather than giving actual
less probable. Thus some total reckoning of the net
arguments. Demea then retorts that being an
resemblance—relevant similarities minus relevant
"anthropomorphite," like Cleanthes, is just as bad as being a
differences—is needed.
mystic and that Cleanthes's insistence that God has human-
like qualities is clear anthropomorphism. Humans are fractured
At the end of Part 2, Philo says that the success of Nicolaus and variable, whereas God is unified and unchanging.
Copernicus's (1473–1543) theories in astronomy relied on the
numerous relevant similarities between the movements of Cleanthes doubles down and affirms that being a mystic is
distinct planets and moons. Philo claims that Cleanthes's equivalent to being an atheist. Those who insist upon the
argument for the existence of an intelligent creator, however, unchanging nature of God are, in fact, arguing that God is
rests on cases that contain more differences than similarities. mindless. "A mind whose ... ideas are not distinct and
In Part 3, Cleanthes retorts that Philo badly overstates the successive ... which has no thought ... is no mind at all,"
differences and badly understates the similarities between Cleanthes says. Philo points out that by saying this, Cleanthes
human-made things and naturally occurring ones. He mocks is labeling every orthodox Christian philosopher and theologian
with a pair of examples intended to show that Philo is focusing as an atheist. Then Philo proposes to explain to Cleanthes
on completely irrelevant differences to improperly tilt the where the argument goes wrong.
balance against Cleanthes's argument. In one example

Appeals to both reason and experience, Philo says, confirm

that a thing is caused by something that is like it. Orderliness humankind was created in God's image to the conclusion that
must be caused by orderliness, physical phenomena by God must resemble man. Instead, he starts with knowledge of
physical phenomena, and mental phenomena by mental what humankind is like and then reasons, from noting the
phenomena. However, in the physical world and in the mind, similarity of human-made objects with natural objects, that God
there is both order and disorder. There are causes for things must resemble humanity.
that can be seen and causes for human thoughts, but it is
impossible to trace back the origin of the "material world" to Cleanthes's charge that Demea is a mystic centers on Demea's
the cause because there is always a cause behind each cause, insistence that God is to be worshipped more than understood.
a "new intelligent principle." "The first step [that humans] make Throughout the Dialogues Demea attempts to defend the view
leads [them] on forever" into a never-ending series of further that God's nature is not something about which anything
questions. "Why not stop at the material world," Philo asks, if definite can be said. In Part 2 Demea explicitly states that he
this world "rests upon some other, and so on without end?" wishes to preserve the "adorable mysteriousness of the Divine
Nature." Mysticism has a long history in Christianity, starting
Cleanthes despairs over Philo's reasoning, saying that in with early figures such as Saul of Tarsus, who is better known
common sense reasoning, the fact that a person cannot as St. Paul the Apostle. The central feature of mystical views in
explain something back to its remote causal origins does not Christianity is that there is something ineffable, or not capable
mean that they are completely ignorant. "You start abstruse of being expressed or understood in words, about God. What
doubts ... you ask me what is the cause of this cause," can be said is vague, to the effect of what Demea quotes in
Cleanthes complains. Cleanthes then adds to his lament, "I Part 2 from Nicolas Malebranche: God exists and is perfect
know not; I care not ... I have found a Deity; and here I stop my without limit.
inquiry." Philo responds that Cleanthes is not conducting a
proper inquiry as either a rationalist who relies on reason or a
naturalist who relies on experience would. Both parties Part 5
"explain particular effects by more general causes, though
these general causes ... remain ... totally inexplicable." However,
they would not be satisfied to explain "a particular effect by a
Summary
particular cause" that "was no more to be accounted for than
the effect itself." In other words, they would not venture to
Philo continues haranguing Cleanthes's attempts to argue for
explain a cause if all that was known was the effect.
the existence of God by the analogy of human-made objects,
which, Philo says, is an empirical argument, that is, an
argument made from experience and observation. Philo states
Analysis to Cleanthes, "Like effects prove like causes. This is the
experiential argument; and this, you say too, is the sole
Demea's charge that Cleanthes is an anthropomorphite is likely
theological argument." Philo next brings up the famous Roman
meant to suggest that his religious thinking mirrors that of
orator Cicero's objection to a similar argument Plato had made.
pagans, whom the early Christian church often criticized for
Cicero's objection was as follows: If God made the world
treating divine beings as simply "bigger" human beings.
similar to how humans build houses, then God would have used
However, this idea was not without precedent in Christian
specific tools just as humans do. There should also be specific
theology. The followers of Audaeus in Syria during the 4th
workmen, or "agents," that God used. If the universe is like a
century believed that God, who they believed made humanity in
house, then it must be caused like a house. Thus it must have
the divine image, had to resemble humanity in every detail. This
been built with tools and workers.
idea, which is referred to in theological literature as the imago
Dei (literally, "the image of God"), is the focus of significant However, when the principle that "like effects prove like
debate. Taking this point of view as literal led to the causes" is taken seriously, Philo continues, it is possible to see
anthropomorphism practice by the followers of Audaeus. that there is no way to conclude that God is infinite or perfect.
Cleanthes's view requires a less literal but not fully No house nor any other human-made object is perfect. Neither
metaphorical interpretation of imago Dei. However, Cleanthes is any natural object infinite or perfect. Because every effect
does not proceed from any biblical statement to the effect that

observed in human experience is imperfect, and the only safely be concluded based on their evidence. The effect of the
causes in that experience are also imperfect, then there are no aporia is as if to say: "You think you can answer this one
grounds to conclude that the creator of the universe is perfect. question? Then you should also be able to answer the rest of
Cleanthes's argument taken to its logical conclusion, Philo these on that basis. No? Maybe you should rethink that first
says, should say that God is in every way like a human being. answer then."
Philo concludes, saying of Cleanthes's claims, that anyone
"who follows your hypothesis ... is left ... to fix ... his theology by
utmost license of fancy and hypothesis." Part 6
Cleanthes, undeterred, responds by mocking the rambling way
in which Philo speaks. Cleanthes also notes directly to Philo:
even "by the utmost indulgence of your imagination, you never
Summary
get rid of the hypothesis of design in the universe." Cleanthes
Demea, who did not speak in Part 5, now joins the conversation
claims that as long as the explanation of the universe invokes
between Cleanthes and Philo. Responding to Cleanthes's
design by some measure of intelligence, he considers himself
declaration that all he cares about is proving some manner of
to be vindicated.
intelligent design behind the existence of the universe, Demea
complains, "It must be a slight fabric, indeed ... which can be
Analysis erected on so tottering a foundation." In other words, Demea

accuses Cleanthes's argument of being weak. Philo continues
The argument Plato gives that is similar to Cleanthes's his strategy of agreeing with Demea and then piling on further
reasoning is from the Timaeus, the subject of which is the arguments. Philo points out that the basis of Cleanthes's
creation of the universe. Plato proposes that the universe was argument would be just as plausible as saying that the world
created by a being called the Demiurge, who is intelligent and was like the body of an animal and that God was like its mind.
benevolent. Like Cleanthes's account, Plato's arguments in the The reason Philo gives is that human limbs indicate that such a
Timaeus are based on observation of the world—an unusual thing as a human head exists—even if people could not see
tactic for Plato, whose methods are typically firmly rooted in human heads but could see only arms and legs. In Philo's
the a priori, rationalist camp. Cicero's critique of the account analogy, the sun, representing God, is the head of the earth.
found in Timaeus, which is quoted in Part 5, is part of a larger The earth is the body, "and [God] is the Soul of the world,
criticism of various theories about the origin of the world that actuating it, and actuated by it." Philo adds that many ancient
Cicero writes about in De Natura Deorum (On the Nature of the philosophers preferred this view and that Cleanthes should not
Gods). In addition to the criticism Philo quotes, Cicero asks be surprised by such a view.
why the intelligent creator chose the exact time it did to create
After admitting that such a theory never occurred to him,
the world. He notes that it doesn't follow from the fact that the
Cleanthes responds. He says that the universe does not
world was at some point furnished with life that the world did
resemble an animal because it doesn't have a nose, eyes, or
not exist for some time without life. Nor does it follow that time
ears, the ability to think or reason, nor a "precise origin of
only began when the world was created. Hence another
motion or action." Rather than an animal, the world more
question arises, according to Cicero, of why the creator chose
resembles a vegetable, Cleanthes quips. He also says that
to create precisely when it did.
Philo's argument, picked up from ancient philosophers, implies
Cicero's litany of questions mirrors Philo's harangue of that the world has existed forever instead of being relatively
Cleanthes. Cicero and Philo are both engaging in a rhetorical young. However, Cleanthes adds, there is more reason to
tactic called aporia in which a speaker asks a series of suppose that the universe is young rather than eternal. He
rhetorical questions they don't expect to get any answers to points to the adaptability of plant and animal species to regions
largely because they don't believe there is an answer. Aporia is to which they are not native. He gives examples of how the
a means of using rhetorical questions to express doubt. The cherry tree has been imported from Asia, grape vines to
point is that both Cicero and Philo want to demonstrate that France, and how "cows, sheep, swine, dogs, [and] corn" have
Plato and Cleanthes, respectively, are overreaching what can been in America for only less than three centuries. Further,

these plants and animals have thrived in those environments. alternative, Hume selects a theory that shares enough
It's implausible to think that if the world were eternal, no human similarities with Cleanthes to drive home the point that the
beings would have thought to make contact with each other or analogical argument does not uniquely suggest theism. If like
spread these various plants to different climates before, effects imply like causes, and if the Stoic view and Cleanthes's
Cleanthes says to Philo. "We may as well imagine that all men theism, as potential causes, share numerous features, then
would wear stockings for ten thousand years, and never have they are both implied by the human observations and
the sense to think of garters to tie them," Cleanthes adds. experiences Cleanthes points to.
Philo is not impressed by Cleanthes's response. He argues that

there is no reason to prefer the idea that the world is relatively
young to the idea that the world is eternal. Philo argues that
Part 7
the opposite may be true: "proofs may be traced over the
whole earth that ... this globe has continued for ... ages ...
entirely covered in water." Hence, there is evidence that the
Summary
earth has gone through periods of upheaval that could have
Philo continues his critique of Cleanthes's argument, pointing
prevented the universal spread of people, plants, and animals
out that the mode of generation of the world is more likely to
that Cleanthes insists would be observable if the world had
resemble the way plants or animals are generated. Philo says
existed eternally. Generally, Philo continues, there is no reason
that Cleanthes has tried to conclude about the nature of the
for Cleanthes to prefer the hypothesis that there is a single
whole universe from the smallest part of it, namely things that
creator god over the hypothesis that there are 30,000 gods.
are human-made.
"All the systems of "skepticism, polytheism, and theism" are
equally possible, Philo says, "no one of them has any
Demea responds, perplexed by how a universe could be
advantage over the others."
generated like an animal or vegetable is and on the basis of
what data such a hypothesis could be proven. Philo responds
that his point against Cleanthes has been exactly that—there is
Analysis no such data "to support any cosmogony." Human experience
is too limited to provide sufficient evidence. If the only method
One of the ancient schools that believed that God was
allowed is comparing the likeness of outcomes and causes
essentially the spirit to the world's body was the school of the
then, Philo contends, there is more likeness between an animal
Stoics. They thought of God as the animating force that moved
or vegetable and the universe than there is between the
the otherwise inert matter. The idea of spirit here is not an
universe and human artifacts.
immaterial one, as Stoics believed that everything that exists is
physical. Instead, the concept of spirit is more like breath or Again, Demea objects, arguing that a universe that could
heat. Cleanthes's response to Philo's claim of plausibility for a reproduce like a plant or animal would be so wondrous as to
theory like the Stoics'—that the earth is somehow like God's imply that intelligent design was the ultimate cause. Philo
body—seems like a non sequitur when Cleanthes states that it responds that actual trees and animals grow and reproduce
implies that the world is eternal. The reasoning behind this without intelligence or design and says that insisting that their
objection, which is how Cleanthes means his statement to be operations give evidence for design is just begging the
taken, is not made clear. However, the Stoics did argue that question—arguing in a circle. All parties to the debate, says
the universe is eternal, going through cycles of collapse and Philo, have agreed not to ask the unceasing "and what caused
reorganization. This connection suggests that the Stoic view that?" question. Cleanthes's argument is on the same footing
was exactly what Hume had in mind for Philo and Cleanthes to as Philo's suggestions. At least the idea that the world was
discuss though he does not have them specifically say so. generated like an animal has the advantage of being thought
reasonable throughout the ancient world, according to Philo.
The fact that the Stoics believed all existing things are physical
Cleanthes mocks Philo, sarcastically praising his skill at coming
is important to Philo's argument against Cleanthes. Cleanthes
up with bizarre objections, and he states that all reason and
supposes that his argument regarding like effects suggests his
common sense disagree with Philo.
version of theism. By having Philo suggest the Stoic view as an

thinking, but rather, all reasoning and ability to think, as human

Analysis beings can, ultimately comes from matter. For Philo, it doesn't
make sense to conclude that the universe was created into
Philo comments that the universe more closely resembles an
being by God's thoughts or intelligent planning since animals
animal than a watch. About 20 years after Hume's Dialogues
and plants produce more animals and plants without having to
were published, William Paley articulated a version of the
think about it.
teleological argument from design called the "watchmaker
argument." This argument, rather than operating on the
principle that like effects have like causes, points to two
relevant criteria for detecting evidence of intelligent design.
Part 8
First, the object needs to fulfill a purpose that an intelligent
being would find helpful, and second, the object needs to be
put together in such a way that the arrangement and size of its Summary
parts have to be exactly as they are for it to function. The
name "watchmaker argument" comes from Paley's specific Philo responds to Cleanthes that it is not his imagination, but
example. He argues that if a person found a watch while the nature of the subject matter that allows so many rival
walking in the forest, they would infer that someone had made theories to stand on equal footing. Because human experience
it rather than that the watch had grown from a tree or and reasoning are so limited, there are not many subjects upon
spontaneously appeared. Paley designed his argument which decisive answers can be reached. In any subject where
specifically to avoid the problems with simple analogy there is no such answer, infinitely many and infinitely strange
arguments Hume had pointed out in the Dialogues. theories are available. Even theories that have received nearly
universal criticism, like Epicurus's view that matter is infinite,
In response to Demea's question about whether a universe are not really out of the running.
that propagated itself like a plant would itself serve as
evidence for design, Philo says that making such an argument Demea objects that a theory like Epicurus's requires that
would beg the question. This phrase has a specific meaning in movement in matter could occur of its own accord. Philo
the philosophical context. It does not mean simply to bring up a admits this is true but notes that there is nothing in human
further, important question. Instead, to beg the question is to experience that bars this inference. Many of the natural
engage in circular reasoning, or petitio principii. The name motions recently discovered by science seem to go on of their
"circular reasoning" comes from the fact that when a person own accord, and to assume that some hidden intelligent force
begs the question, they assume in the premises of their is the real explanation "is mere hypothesis; and hypothesis
argument what they purport to prove in the conclusion of the attended with no advantages." On this basis, Philo proceeds to
same argument. Hence, the conclusion justifies the premises outline another possible origin for the universe. Rather than
and vice versa, in a circle. For example, if a person argues that resembling human, animal, or vegetable, the universe is just a
God exists because the Bible says so and that the Bible can be perpetually agitated collection of matter that sometimes falls
believed because God inspired it, they are begging the into a stable pattern for a time.
question. The Bible can be inspired by God only if God exists,
Cleanthes points out objections to Philo's spontaneously
and hence the conclusion that "God exists" must be true in
created cosmogony. He notes that all kinds of other stable
order for the biblical evidence to have any force. In the
patterns could have occurred that resembled the actual shape
discussion between Demea and Philo, the question at issue is
of the universe—patterns in which humans and animals
whether the orderliness of the universe has to be explained by
survived but lacked the apt forms and abilities they have in the
intelligent design. Demea says that Philo's idea of a universe
real world. He argues that this particular stable pattern with
generating new universes just as plants and trees generate
creatures who are well suited to thrive in their world implies
more plants and trees is proof of intelligent design because it
intelligent design. Philo concedes that his hypotheses have
is so "wonderful" that such a thing could only be produced by
shortcomings, but he points out that so do Cleanthes's, and so
intelligent design. Philo also sees Demea's logic as begging the
does every theology. Because of this weakness in all of the
question because, in the observable universe, matter (animals,
theories, Philo reasons that the ultimate victor is the skeptic
plants, trees, people) does not come from reasoning or

who claims that, "no absurdity ought ever to be assented to different version of the teleological argument for the existence
with regard to any subject." of God. Rather than relying on the idea that like causes imply
like effects, he argues for the existence of God based on the
close fit between animals and their environments. This sort of
Analysis argument is called a "fine-tuning" argument. The idea is that
conditions in the universe are just right for life to exist and that
The theory of Epicurus that Demea, Cleanthes, and Philo life-forms have characteristics that are just right to allow them
discuss is called atomism. In ancient Greece, atomism was the to thrive in the universe. This type of argument was highly
view that the universe was composed of myriad, indivisible, and influential in the 19th century, popularized by William Paley, an
minuscule objects known as atoms. The indivisibility of these English philosopher and priest, who wrote extensively in favor
objects is the source of their name, as atom meant of various forms of the teleological argument for the existence
"uncuttable" in Greek. All of the objects in the universe are, of God.
according to the atomists, groups of atoms that have
temporarily accumulated into a stable grouping. The
explanation for atoms coming to form groups is that they are Part 9
ceaselessly moving through a void and that in this movement
they randomly come together. Epicurus was not the original
proponent of the atomist position but refined the view that
came from Leucippus and his student Democritus in the 5th
Summary
century BCE.
Demea asks whether it would be better to abandon a posteriori
The reason for the universal ridicule of atomism expressed in arguments based on experience in favor of a priori arguments
the Dialogues is its assertion that the apparent orderliness of based on reason alone. Cleanthes replies that because an
the world is a product of randomness. David Hume, though he argument is simpler and easier to make does not mean that it
did not accept any arguments for the existence of God, did is correct. The specific argument Demea had in mind hinges on
believe that the universe was a fundamentally orderly place. the problem that an infinite cause, such as the origin of the
Hence, he thought that an Epicurean-style argument was universe, cannot be determined from the point of view of its
ultimately no good. Richard H. Popkin, editor of the Hackett finite effect, such as the world is. Further, Demea says, the
Publishing Company edition of the Dialogues, goes as far as argument is "a common one" in that "[w]hatever exists must
saying that Hume acknowledges that some sort of intelligent have a cause or reason of its existence." It is impossible for
being is required to explain the orderliness of the universe. anything to produce itself, Demea adds. Trying to discover the
However, Hume denies that anything specific can be said "ultimate" cause requires "tracing an infinite succession" of
about the nature of that intelligence. Hume's viewpoint is causes backward to that which is a "necessarily existent
represented by Philo's constant criticism of Cleanthes's being," such as God is. A necessarily existent being "carries
insistence that God must closely resemble human beings the reason of his existence in himself." Demea's viewpoint
because of the analogy between human-created objects and holds that such a being exists: "there is a Deity." God's
natural objects. The view that the universe is an orderly place, existence is simply demonstrated without going to all the
designed by an abstract intelligence with no discernible moral trouble the foregoing debate between Cleanthes, Demea, and
qualities, is called deism. Deists reject all of the organized Philo has caused.
trappings of religion, particularly religious fanaticism. This view

Cleanthes, however, objects. Demea's argument is weak and
was notably prominent among the founders of the United
ill-grounded, Cleanthes says, and "of ... little consequence to
States, such as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin.
the cause of true piety and religion." He argues that the claim
Author J.C.A Gaskin, who wrote the book Hume's Philosophy of
that God's nonexistence is as unthinkable as "twice two not ...
Religion (1978), argues that it is plausible to ascribe some form
[being] four" is nothing more than wishful thinking. In general
of the deist view to Hume, based in part on Philo's conclusions
Cleanthes claims that the term "necessary existence" is
at the end of the Dialogues.
meaningless. Cleanthes sees Demea's argument as being
At the end of Part 8, Cleanthes provides an example of a contingent on "both ... the matter and form of the world."

However, whatever God is, "it must be some unknown requires something else. Moved movers cannot provide this
inconceivable qualities which can make his non-existence explanation because they presuppose a previous instance of
appear impossible or his attributes unalterable." Also it is motion. Therefore, entities that are capable of causing motion,
impossible for human beings to deduce by reason why "these but are not themselves the result of motion, are required.
qualities may not belong to matter." Philo chimes in and agrees These are the "unmoved movers." Ultimately, Aristotle is
that the sort of a priori arguments that Demea favors, and arguing for some sort of divine entity, though clearly not the
Cleanthes despises, are not useful for religious purposes God whom Demea is after. However, Aristotle's argument form
because "people, even of good sense and the best inclined here is what inspired the cosmological arguments of St.
toward religion, feel always some deficiency in such Thomas Aquinas, the 13th-century theologian, who is the most
arguments." celebrated interpreter and proponent of Aristotelian
philosophy in history.
Analysis
Part 10
The sort of argument Demea describes is called a
cosmological argument. Cosmological arguments argue that
the fact that the universe exists at all directly demonstrates
that God exists. The simplest version of the argument, the one
Summary
Demea puts forward, is a contingency argument. Contingent
Demea begins by pursuing a different line of argument. He
things refer to beings that exist—but could have not
says that most people are led to religion by "a consciousness
existed—and then also cease to exist. Contingent things are
of his imbecility and misery rather than from any reasoning."
dependent upon each other or something else for their
Without religion, Demea claims, people would have no solace
existence. Demea proceeds by noting that every contingent
from the evils they inflict on others and the evils others inflict
thing needs a cause. Finding the cause of every cause
on them. Philo agrees, saying that the best way to persuade
continues in an unending series of explanations, which is called
people to religion is by "a talent of eloquence." Demea and
an infinite regress. Because an infinite regress provides no
Philo both voice the opinion that all people, both educated and
explanation, ultimately, there is a need for some uncaused
foolish, and all traditions, both Christian and heathen, agree
entity or event to stop the regress by finding a cause that
that the human experience is primarily characterized by
cannot not exist or rather must exist. It can't be that a being
suffering. Demea ventures a guess that every author in every
causes itself, and it can't be that a being is caused by nothing,
book on Cleanthes's shelves would say the same.
so what is needed is an entity that is not contingent and,
therefore, does not stand in need of being explained by Here Philo disagrees, noting that the philosopher Leibniz
something further. This type of being is what Demea means produced an argument against the claim that the world is
when he talks about a "necessarily existent being." A deductive overall bad. However, the two immediately pass over Leibniz's
argument made in terms of contingent things must always argument and continue to discuss the general misery that
conclude that the universe is contingent—it cannot cause inflicts all humans and animals. Even humanity's ability to
itself—and, therefore, the necessary being is something other cooperate to form societies does not alleviate their problems.
than the universe. The name for this source is what is meant by Demea adds that it is not only from animals, nature, and other
the term God. humans that misery comes, but also—if not mostly—from
within. "The disorders of the mind," Demea says, "though more
Arguments of this form go back to the beginnings of the
secret, are not perhaps less dismal and vexatious."
Western philosophical tradition. Aristotle's famous "unmoved
mover" argument is a prominent example. In his explanation of After hearing Demea and Philo talk about the miserable
causation, Aristotle argues that observable changes in the condition of humanity, Cleanthes says that though he has
physical world involve motion. Each motion must be actuated noticed this anxiety in other people, he "feel[s] ... nothing of it in
by an earlier motion. All of these observed motions are "moved [him]self, and hope[s] that it is not so common" as Demea
movers," that is, motions that are caused by other motions. represents it. Demea is amazed that Cleanthes can say this,
However, to explain how motion begins in the first place

given that many great thinkers and powerful people throughout religions play on the shared opinion that humans have that life
history have complained of misery. Philo adds that the is characterized by misery and suffering. Philo presses the
ubiquitous misery of humanity poses a problem for Cleanthes's point and gives a clear articulation of the so-called "problem of
arguments for the nature and existence of God. "Is he willing to evil," which argues that a perfect God cannot exist if there is
prevent evil, but not able? then he is impotent," Philo says. The evil in the world. When Philo asks, "Is he willing to prevent evil,
design of nature seems poor, adds Philo, as neither the joys but not able? then he is impotent," he is expressing one of the
nor pains all life is subject to seem necessary to their purpose. key premises in the problem of evil. Another key premise Philo
Cleanthes vehemently denies that Demea and Philo are right, states is that if God can prevent evil but doesn't, then this
and insists that life is not generally miserable. shows God is evil rather than good. Generally, the problem of
evil is the statement that the existence of suffering in the world
Philo is not convinced by Cleanthes's replies. He states that is not compatible with God being perfect. The existence of evil
Cleanthes is once again going against all the history of shows that even if there is a divine being, that being must be
religious thought by insisting that the world and humanity are less than perfect in some way.
fundamentally—or even for the most part—happy and good. He
adds that even if he admits that it would be possible for a Philo notes and quickly dismisses the response to the problem
morally good and intelligent God to exist alongside depraved of evil given by 17th-century German philosopher Gottfried
and benighted humanity, it would not work for Cleanthes's Wilhelm Leibniz. Famously, Leibniz stated that God had
argument. created the best of all possible worlds and that any suffering
that exists in the world is an unavoidable price of securing a
greater good. Because God is perfect—including being
Analysis omnipotent and omniscient—God is aware of every possible
way that the universe might have been made. From among
The claim Philo makes at the end of Part 9—that religious these, God chose the best one possible—the one that had the
feeling doesn't come from reason—Demea agrees with at the greatest balance of good over evil. Any contention that a
beginning of Part 10. They both recognize that reasoned better world could have been selected comes from the limited
arguments are not the primary way by which people are perspective of human beings.
convinced of religion. Instead, arguments that appeal to their
emotions are more effective. Here Demea and Philo are
invoking the different forms of persuasion outlined by Aristotle Part 11
in his book Rhetoric. According to Aristotle, there are three
distinct modes of persuasion: logos, pathos, and ethos.
Of the three, logos, is the only one that involves reasoned Summary
argument. For Aristotle this means that the persuasive factors
are contained in the statements themselves. He called this Cleanthes mocks Philo and Demea again, saying that the
form logos, then, because it was the words themselves that did tendency of theologians and philosophers to use words like
the persuasive work—and logos is Greek for "word." Pathos, infinite and superlatively great is simply empty rhetoric. He
which is Greek for "emotion," is the form of persuasion that submits that they should be satisfied to prove that God is
works by appealing to what the hearer already feels. The "finitely perfect, though far exceeding mankind." This viewpoint
persuasive work is done not by the content itself but rather by would explain the magnificent, if not perfect, design of the
the emotional state of the listeners. Finally, ethos, which means universe. It would give "a satisfactory account" of why moral
"character" in Greek, is the form of persuasion that works by evil exists as well as the hardships found in nature. Philo flatly
appealing to the characteristics of the speaker. The persuasive denies the plausibility of Cleanthes's new suggestion. Philo
work is done by the speaker highlighting their own admirable compares it to an architect who attempts to convince a
and authoritative qualities. common man that his design of a house with uncomfortable
rooms and confusing halls is, overall, well designed. No one
Demea and Philo argue that appeals to emotion are the most would be convinced. Further, people would naturally think that
effective means of persuading people toward religion because "if the architect had had skill and good intentions, he might

have ... remedied all or most of these inconveniences." "a being than which no greater can be conceived." This
statement is a brief way of expressing that God has every
Philo continues, comparing the supposed creator of the world possible perfection to the utmost degree. It is also exactly the
with a "rigid master" rather than an "indulgent parent." All life sort of language that Cleanthes's mocks in Part 11. Anselm
has been given just enough to barely fulfill its functions, but no considers existing in reality—as opposed to merely in the
more. Any adversity or hardship makes an animal or human imagination—as a perfection. Therefore, because God has
miserable. A parent, rather than a taskmaster, would have every perfection God must exist in reality. If God were to exist
made creatures with enough to account for setbacks and in only the imagination, then it would be possible to imagine a
disasters. In general, the misery of the world is attributable to greater being than God—namely, one that existed in reality.
four circumstances: 1) the role of pain and pleasure in However, by definition, it is not possible to imagine a being
motivating creatures; 2) the ordering of the universe by way of greater than God, so God must exist in reality.
general laws of nature; 3) the merely sufficient endowments
for survival every creature possesses; and 4) the poor
craftsmanship of the universe.
Part 12
Demea is disturbed by the direction of Cleanthes and Philo's
argument. To show this disapproval, Demea says, "I joined in an
alliance with [Philo] in order to prove the incomprehensible Summary
nature of the Divine Being, and refute the principles of
Cleanthes." Demea wonders if Philo is actually an atheist and Cleanthes and Philo, now alone, now summarize the discussion
more dangerous than Cleanthes. Cleanthes mocks Demea for they had with Demea. Cleanthes admires Philo's disregard for
taking so long to realize what Philo was up to. Cleanthes then "vulgar superstition" and his enthusiasm for thinking issues out
criticizes the reasoning of the historical and "vulgar," or to their logical extremes. Philo comments that he is boldest
common, theologians. Philo replies that orthodox theology is when he discusses natural religion because he "can never ...
not stupid or monstrous, just too slow to change with the corrupt the principles of any man of common sense ... and
advancement of knowledge. At this point Demea leaves, not because no one ... will ever mistake [his] intentions." He says to
wanting to continue the conversation. Cleanthes that he is, in truth, quite reverent of God. He believes
that the idea that the universe is designed is acceptable to
anyone not "hardened in absurd systems as at all times to
Analysis reject it."
Cleanthes's ridicule of the tendency of philosophers and Philo, now seeming to agree with Cleanthes, enumerates
theologians relates to the language used to characterize God several examples of discoveries made in natural science that
in logical arguments. Notable instances of these can be found lend credence to the idea that the universe was finely
in the ontological type of arguments for the existence of God. engineered. "All the sciences almost lead us insensibly to
These arguments aim to establish that God must necessarily acknowledge a first intelligent Author," Philo says. Cleanthes
exist because of features of the concept of God. Because adds that his theist philosophy can be also be supported by
these arguments do not require a person to engage in any strong arguments, and it agrees closely with common sense.
observation or have any specific experiences, they are an a Philo says that the sort of objections he lodged earlier are best
priori type of argument deduced theoretically. This type seen as mere "verbal disputes." He argues that the theist and
contrasts directly with the a posteriori nature of Cleanthes's atheist are engaged in a merely verbal dispute: the theist
teleological arguments, which proceed from observations and believes that God's mind has some similarity with the human
experiences of the existence of functioning of objects in the mind, and the atheist believes that the orderliness of the
world. universe bears some resemblance to an intelligently created

order.
The 11th-century theologian St. Anselm of Canterbury is
credited with the first explicit version of the ontological The two now begin to discuss the usefulness of religion. They
argument, which appears in his Proslogion. It describes God as both use the term "vulgar superstition" when referring to

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Study Guide Quotes 23
organized religion. Philo claims that it is a harmful absurdity, so-called "evidential theists," who argue that religious belief
whereas Cleanthes counters, "Religion, however corrupted, is can and ought to be supported by evidence. Cleanthes's
still better than no religion at all." To support his claim, Philo position is an example of evidential theism, as he claims that
notes that during historical periods when religion has been human experience and observation of the natural world
prominent, there has been a greater level of war and provides sufficient evidence to prove the existence of God.
oppression. Cleanthes suggests that this is a misuse of religion Demea is also an example of an evidential theist, though he
caused by human greed, rather than a problem in religion itself. takes from a priori cosmological and ontological arguments to
Philo counters that human greed is precisely why anything provide the relevant evidence.
other than "philosophical and rational" religion will always lead
to war and oppression: the promise of infinite and eternal While Hume himself may not have actually subscribed to
rewards urges human greed onward. fideism, other prominent philosophers like Blaise Pascal, Søren
Kierkegaard, William James, and Ludwig Wittgenstein have
Cleanthes and Philo end their discussion by considering the embraced it. James, for example, in his "Will to Believe" essay,
extent to which religion provides any comfort from the misery says that when the choice between competing theories isn't
of life. Cleanthes says that the fact that people turn to religion decided on the basis of evidence, it is open for a person to
in their times of need shows that it does. However, Philo choose which theory to believe. This theory applies specifically
contends that the fact that people turn most to religion when to occasions when someone is forced to make some kind of
they are miserable shows that "the religious spirit is not so choice, and the choice that they make has significant practical
nearly allied to joy as to sorrow." He continues, saying that all effects on their life. James argues that all of these conditions
that a philosophical and rational religion will believe is that "the apply to the choice between theism and atheism.
... causes of order in the universe probably bear some remote
analogy to human intelligence." Because this concept is of no
use to everyday life and solves no important theological
g Quotes
questions, Philo maintains that the only hope for organized
religion is the existence of truth that is revealed by God.
Moreover, Philo argues that the skeptical person, far from "It is only as a science ... subjected
being an atheist, will be ready and willing to receive such
revealed truth. The last line, from Pamphilus, ranks the ideas of to human reasoning ... that I
Cleanthes, Demea, and Philo according to how plausible he
postpone the study of natural
finds them. He puts Cleanthes first, Philo second, and Demea
third. theology."
— Demea, Part 1
Analysis
Philo's closing remarks that properly educated and skeptical Hume has Demea clarify the subject of the Dialogues early on.
people will be receptive to the idea that divine truths can be They do not discuss religion on theological grounds but rather
learned through revelation have been taken to support an idea on rational and scientific grounds. The parties to the dialogue
known as fideism. Fideism is the view that religious belief is not distinguish between natural theology and natural religion when
sustainable on the basis of reason, but only on faith. However, discussing the proper order of subjects in a child's education.
any credence the Dialogues suggest Hume gave to the fideist Demea notes that he teaches his own children "piety" early on
idea may have been Hume attempting to disguise his actual but natural theology later. By piety he means believing religious
views. doctrines as articles of faith. Natural theology is the study of

religious doctrines as philosophical and scientific claims.
Fideists often argue not only that religious belief is not
sustainable by reason, but also that it may even be
inappropriate to attempt and support them by means of "Our ideas reach no farther than
reasoned argument. This feature distinguishes fideists from

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Study Guide Quotes 24
our experience: We have no author."

experience of divine attributes and
— Cleanthes, Part 4
operations."
Cleanthes is putting forward a teleological argument for the
— Philo, Part 2 existence of God. This argument is also known as an intelligent
design argument. Such arguments claim that all objects and
Philo is agreeing with Demea's claim that the only question phenomena have clear and specific purposes. They are so
about God is his nature, rather than whether he exists. On this intricately and well suited to these purposes that, so the
score, however, Philo states that human ideas come up argument goes, it must be the case that an entity capable of
radically short. There is no philosophical or scientific way to purposeful and skillful design created them.
approach the question because only human experience can
provide the data for philosophy and science. Both the nature
and being of God, then, are ultimately articles of faith. "Many inexplicable difficulties in ...
Nature ... [allowing] a perfect
"Your objections ... are no better author to be proved a priori, are
than the abstruse cavils of those easily solved."
philosophers who denied motion."
— Philo, Part 5
Philo outlines one of the shortcomings of Cleanthes's design
argument. He states that an argument that is a priori—that is,
Cleanthes is objecting to Philo's argument that it is not
one that does not require observing anything but comes about
possible to prove the existence of a deity who is an intelligent
through using deductive reasoning—can establish the usual
designer of a machine-like world by analogy with human-made
beliefs in the perfection of God without having to assume that
engineering. According to Cleanthes, there is no need for a
God has any resemblance to humans. The problem with
separate proof that human-made objects resemble natural
depicting God as bearing resemblances to humans is that
objects. He thinks Philo's arguments that human-made objects
humans are radically imperfect. Therefore, any such
and natural objects are too dissimilar to use in an analogical
resemblance would require believing God is a lesser being.
argument are as ludicrous as arguments that motion is
impossible. Just like a person can get up and walk around to
prove that motion is possible without any sophisticated
arguments, Cleanthes believes that a person can simply point
"It must be a slight fabric ... which
directly to the design-like features of both human-made and can be erected on so tottering a
natural objects without need for arguments.
foundation."
"The order and arrangement of — Demea, Part 6
Nature ... the plain use and

The debate between Philo and Cleanthes, having led to ideas
intention of every part and organ ... of gods that might be few or numerous—alive or
dead—disturbs Demea. He is complaining that what natural
bespeak ... an intelligent cause or
religions seem to allow does not resemble anything at all

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Study Guide Glossary 25
worthy of the worship or adoration talked about in theological

contradiction ... There is no being
discussions of religion.
... whose non-existence implies a
contradiction."
"The world plainly resembles more
an animal or a vegetable than it — Cleanthes, Part 9
does a watch."
Cleanthes is responding to Demea, who has given an a priori
argument (based on reason) for the existence of God that he
— Philo, Part 7
claims avoids all the problems with the a posteriori (based on
experience) arguments of Cleanthes. Demea's argument is
Doubling down on his criticism of Cleanthes's intelligent design that God is a being the nonexistence of which implies a
arguments, Philo claims that the world is more like a plant or contradiction. That is, he argues that saying, "God doesn't
animal than a machine. The focus on what exactly God or the exist" is like saying it's raining here, and it is also not raining
world is more like is important because Cleanthes insists that here. Cleanthes responds that every being can coherently be
the only way to reason about God is by analogy with elements imagined not to exist, so Demea's argument is a nonstarter.
of everyday experience. Philo counters that, if Cleanthes's
claims are taken seriously, then animals and plants make a
better analogy for God and creation than human-made
"To be a philosophical skeptic is ...
machines.
the first and most essential step
towards being a sound, believing
"Whence arise the many
Christian."
conveniences ... which ... animals
possess? [A]ny one of them is — Philo, Part 12
sufficient proof of design."

In his closing remarks Philo observes that those who are most
likely to accept the existence of God on the basis of divinely
revealed truths are skeptics. The reason for this is that they
are well acquainted with the serious shortcomings of
In response to Philo's criticism of his argument, Cleanthes humanity's reasoning capabilities. Those who put too much
replies that while humans and other animals could scrape by stock in the power of human reasoning, like Cleanthes, will
without having some of the well-adapted characteristics they invariably be led to blasphemy and heresy. This statement is
possess, they do not merely scrape by. Instead, they thrive by meant to be a surprising conclusion, as skepticism is often
virtue of many characteristics that are not strictly necessary. viewed as synonymous with atheism.
Blind nature without design, he argues, would not endow
creatures with advantages that let them thrive. Hence the
possession of such advantages by all animals and humans
provides evidence from experience of purposeful and m Glossary
benevolent design by some perfect intelligence.
academic skepticism (n) school of philosophical thought that

pursued a skeptical approach, claiming no knowledge is
"Nothing that is distinctly possible
conceivable implies a

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Study Guide Glossary 26
analogy (n) arguments that claim that because two things

share one sort of similarity they therefore share other
similarities
anthropomorphism (n) in theology, the view that God

resembles humans mentally and/or physically
a posteriori (adj) statements or reasoning that proceed from

observation or experience
a priori (adj) statements or reasoning that do not proceed from

observation or experience but from the logical relation of
concepts or by deduction
atheism (n) belief that God does not exist
chimerical (adj) something that is desirable but impossible to

achieve
Copernican (adj) referring to the shift in philosophical and

scientific thinking occasioned by the proof of a heliocentric
(sun-centered) model of the solar system
cosmogony (n) theories regarding the origins of the universe
peripatetics (n) school of philosophical thought focusing on

arguments proceeding from observation and experience
Platonists (n) school of philosophical thought following Plato

that stresses the existence of pure and abstract forms in
metaphysics
Pyrrhonians (n) school of philosophical thought arguing that all

belief is unjustified and advocating that peace of mind comes
from suspending judgment
skepticism (n) view that knowledge, either in a specific domain

or in general, is not achievable
Stoics (n) school of philosophical thought arguing that the

universe is intelligently guided and emotional response to
events not in one's control is inappropriate
theism (n) belief that God does exist
vulgar (adj) relating to the common people; widely shared and

unrefined viewpoints
All material contained within this document/guide is protected by copyright law of the US and various other
jurisdictions and may not be reproduced or distributed without the express written consent. Contact Course Hero
with respect to reproduction or distribution. This document was downloaded from Coursehero.com on
01-02-2023 by 100000805923526.

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dialogues

an atheist (though what he believed is unknown) has since

j Book Basics argument that biological creatures were produced in their

Analogical Reasoning Must Be The Doctrines of Theology and

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Pessimism and the Problem of Philosophical Dialogues

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Full Key Figure List Aristotle (384–322 BCE), an ancient

Philo is one of the three participants in French mathematician and philosopher

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

"Of Miracles." Hume's reputation as an unbeliever, and what if

John Stuart Mill (1806–73) was an

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

resembling a human-made machine, they discuss whether it

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Hume's views led to some of his work, including the Dialogues,

The editor, Richard H. Popkin, gives a partial biography of

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

subject or the view that it is appropriate for a person to

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Demea begins by expressing surprise that Cleanthes thinks

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Philosophers have written much about how effective analogical Part 4

balance against Cleanthes's argument. In one example

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Analysis erected on so tottering a foundation." In other words, Demea

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Philo is not impressed by Cleanthes's response. He argues that

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

thinking, but rather, all reasoning and ability to think, as human

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

trappings of religion, particularly religious fanaticism. This view

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

world. universe bears some resemblance to an intelligently created

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

views. doctrines as articles of faith. Natural theology is the study of

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

our experience: We have no author."

"The order and arrangement of — Demea, Part 6

Nature ... the plain use and

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

worthy of the worship or adoration talked about in theological

sufficient proof of design."

academic skepticism (n) school of philosophical thought that

Copyright © 2023 Course Hero, Inc. Downloaded on 01-02-2023 by 100000805923526

analogy (n) arguments that claim that because two things

anthropomorphism (n) in theology, the view that God

a posteriori (adj) statements or reasoning that proceed from

a priori (adj) statements or reasoning that do not proceed from

atheism (n) belief that God does not exist

chimerical (adj) something that is desirable but impossible to

Copernican (adj) referring to the shift in philosophical and