Hume in the ĎDialogue Concerning Natural Religioní reflects on the possibility of the religious believes in being rational. Hume has a belief that experiences cultivate the knowledge. Therefore, he is an empiricist since experimental evidences convey a belief. The main challenge is based on the possibility of having enough evidence to draw conclusions on the existence of evil and God. This has created uneasiness on the existence of God because Godly issues are based on beliefs (Hume, 2006). He also believes that the survival of evidence can draw conclusions. His school of thought has not conclusively proved that God exists.
Hume handled the existence of God intelligently in that he did not challenge the notion on existence of God. He however argued on the existence of Godís nature, hence, in the book he presented characters numbering different positions on the issue. They are all engaged in a dialogue. Demea on religious Orthodoxy argues that reason cannot consider the nature of God. The nature of God according to Demea is integral and beyond the understanding of human beings; this means that human beings can never comprehend the nature of God
Philo agrees with Demea that the nature of God is beyond the comprehension of the human beings, it is characterized by doubting philosophical beliefs that are accepted as norms. Thus, Philo provides arguments that are more appropriate than Demeaís ones. Cleanthes is the third character and argues standing on the empirical theism.† He continues to insist that human beings come to God through reasoning provided by the nature. This is a stand against Demea and Philo since he reasons that the Universe is comprised of complex existence of human nature and topological features (Hume, 2006). This proves that there is God an intelligent designer. This is an argument based on the analogy that indicates a formal agreement of things in defined respects. The co-existence of the living things and the non-living things reflects the existence of God. There is the creator and creatures diligently put in place on the food web.
Cleanthes continues to insist that the world is in conformity of a tuned machine and that the usage of machine indicates intelligence by humans (Hume, 2006). The world was created by divine intelligence of God hence this indicates that Godís intelligence is excellent and far beyond the human intelligence. The Bible states that humans display Godís image, according to (Hume, 2006) this argument from the perspectives of design which has been claimed to be the best in explaining that religious belief is rational.
Philo in parts 10, 11 and 12 argue against empirical theism in the line of Godís natural attributes. This reflects on Godís perfection, infiniteness and attributes but Philo goes ahead to examine Godís moral attributes. The moral attributes reflect goodness and try to establish the connection with nature. Philo and Demea consider the Universe in their investigations. Cleanthes develops a similar approach on design where he considers the Universe similar to a machine in which Godís intelligence has developed over time. Philo and Demea contrast with Cleanthes by stating that the world is a miserable place with evil all over (Hume, 2006).
Philo goes ahead to argue that the world consists of survival for the fittest when considering the species, meaning that many species are not satisfied terming the world as miserable. The world is filled with evil and that is not a reflection of Godís infinite power, goodness and being wise. Godís moral attributes are not compatible with the nature of the world. Philo argues that from the look of the world, God is impartial in moral and goes ahead to prove that the design argument is invalid and cannot stand. At the end of the chapter, Philo accepts the design argument; this is after performing a clear analysis of the Universe and balancing the evil and the goodness. Goodness out-weighs the evil argument by design prevailing. Philo seems to confer that the World has intelligence in its creation, and the intelligence has some resemblance to the human nature. Hume (2006) notes that disagreement ensues on the intensity of resemblance the analogy measure between God and defines atheist and theist.
Philo continues to insist that organized religion is evil in the assessment of psychological and moral aspects. He continues to institute that only one religion should be in place and that should be the true religion. However, the philosophical belief explains the true religion thus Philo and Cleanthes emerge to an agreement that Christianity exists and that human beings worship in the right way. Atheism is an enemy of Christianity creating uncertainty on the equilibrium position, as Hume tries to explain.
Hume (2006) in chapter twelve analyzes the philosophical movement. This is mainly concerns the rational, religious beliefs British Empiricism and skepticism. He was scared that his works would put him in conflicts with the religious groups and the British government. The publications were released to the public after Humeís death in the year 1776. In my view Philo is the character that mirrors the objections of David Hume.
God is in existence when the Universe is considered. This is because it consists of features that are beyond the explanation to the human nature. This also indicates that there is superior intelligence behind the creations. Godís divine nature has supported the development of the nature consisting of living matter and the dead matter. The formations prove that God is superior over the evil. Hume concludes that the evil has been associated with the destructions and that the intelligence of God is an attribute in the human nature that supersedes the evil.
Chapters 10, 11 and12 display the existence of natural religion. A religion that is justification based and not revelation based. Hume (2006) criticized religious faiths in the form of writings thus quoting a leading fideism in the nineteenth century that profoundly influenced the work of Hume. Many philosophers in religious orthodox supported their arguments by quoting Humeís observations. The book intended to prove that religious beliefs do not directly comparable to the rational basis.
In conclusion, Hume a Scottish philosopher expresses the dialogue on natural religion through Philo, Demea and Cleanthes and debates on the nature of existence of God. The three characters have one thing in common, that God exists, but they differ on the attributes and nature in which God exist (Hume, 2006). They argue that deity knowledge would influence the characters of the humankind. The dialogue took years in writing between 1750 and 1776 Philo and Demea attack the views of Cleanthes on teleology and anthropomorphism. Philo argues that human reason is inadequate to justify divine in nature observations or priori reasoning. David Hume aired out his views in writing in case of his unforeseen death and had left a will observing publications of the material (Hume, 2006).†††††††††