leslie : This Is An Un Official Fan Site Tribute
leslie
Porn Queen Actress Superstar


leslie

Movie Title Year Distributor Notes Rev Formats Ecole de Laetitia 24 1997 Nanou Anal Funny Fan 1997 DBM Video Anal Facial Infirmieres de Laetitia 8 1997 Nanou Anal Ms Movie Star 1 1997 Top Line Schwanz auf Urlaub 1998 DBM Video Anal A2M Sklavinnen 1997 XY Video Anal The teleological or physico-theological argument, also known as the argument from design, or intelligent design argument is an argument for the existence of God or, more generally, for an intelligent creator based on perceived evidence of "intelligent design" in the natural world.[1][2][3] The earliest recorded versions of this argument are associated with Socrates in ancient Greece, although it has been argued that he was taking up an older argument.[4][5] Plato, his student, and Aristotle, Plato's student, developed complex approaches to the proposal that the cosmos has an intelligent cause, but it was the Stoics who, under their influence, "developed the battery of creationist arguments broadly known under the label 'The Argument from Design'".
Abrahamic religions have used the teleological argument in many ways, and it has a long association with them. In the Middle Ages, Islamic theologians such as Al-Ghazali used the argument, although it was rejected as unnecessary by Quranic literalists, and as unconvincing by many Islamic philosophers. Later, the teleological argument was accepted by Saint Thomas Aquinas and included as the fifth of his "Five Ways" of proving the existence of God. In early modern England clergymen such as William Turner and John Ray were well-known proponents. In the early 18th century, William Derham published his Physico-Theology, which gave his "demonstration of the being and attributes of God from his works of creation".[7] Later, William Paley, in his 1802 Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity published a prominent presentation of the design argument with his version of the watchmaker analogy and the first use of the phrase "argument from design".



From its beginning, there have been numerous criticisms of the different versions of the teleological argument, and responses to its challenge to the claims against non-teleological natural science. Especially important were the general logical arguments made by David Hume in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, published 1779, and the explanation of biological complexity given in Charles Darwin's Origin of Species, published in 1859.[9] Since the 1960s, Paley's arguments have been influential in the development of a creation science movement which used phrases such as "design by an intelligent designer", and post 1987 this was rebranded as "intelligent design", promoted by the intelligent design movement. Both movements have used the teleological argument to argue against the modern scientific understanding of evolution, and to claim that supernatural explanations should be given equal validity in the public school science curriculum.[10] Also starting already in classical Greece, two approaches to the teleological argument developed, distinguished by their understanding of whether the natural order was literally created or not. The non-creationist approach starts most clearly with Aristotle, although many thinkers, such as the Neoplatonists, believed it was already intended by Plato. This approach is not creationist in a simple sense, because while it agrees that a cosmic intelligence is responsible for the natural order, it rejects the proposal that this requires a "creator" to physically make and maintain this order. The Neoplatonists did not find the teleological argument convincing, and in this they were followed by medieval philosophers such as Al-Farabi and Avicenna. Later, Averroes and Thomas Aquinas considered the argument acceptable, but not necessarily the best argument. Contemporary defenders of the teleological argument include Richard Swinburne and John Lennox. Contents 1 History 1.1 Classical philosophy 1.1.1 Socrates and the pre-Socratics 1.1.2 Plato and Aristotle 1.1.3 Roman era 1.2 Medieval philosophy and theology 1.2.1 Late classical Christian writers 1.2.2 Islamic philosophy 1.2.3 Jewish philosophy 1.2.4 Thomas Aquinas 1.3 Modernity 1.3.1 Newton and Leibniz 1.3.2 British empiricists 1.3.3 Derham's natural theology 1.3.4 Watchmaker analogy 1.4 Recent proponents 1.4.1 Probabilistic arguments 1.4.2 Fine-tuned universe 1.4.3 Creation science and intelligent design 1.4.4 Unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics 1.4.5 "Third way" proposal 1.4.6 Interacting whole 2 Criticism 2.1 Classical 2.2 David Hume 2.3 Immanuel Kant 2.4 Does not prove the existence of God 2.5 Argument from improbability 2.6 A flawed argument 2.7 Perception of purpose in biology 2.8 Fideism 2.9 Other criticisms 3 Similar discussions in other civilizations 3.1 Hinduism 3.2 Buddhist criticism of Hindu Nyaya logic 3.3 Confucianism 3.4 Taoism 4 See also 5 References 6 Further reading 7 External links History While the concept of an intelligence behind the natural order is ancient, a rational argument that concludes that we can know that the natural world has a designer, or a creating intelligence which has human-like purposes, appears to have begun with classical philosophy.[4] Religious thinkers in Judaism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Islam and Christianity also developed versions of the teleological argument. Later, variants on the argument from design were produced in Western philosophy and by Christian fundamentalism. Classical philosophy Socrates and the pre-Socratics Plato and Aristotle, depicted here in The School of Athens, both developed philosophical arguments addressing the universe's apparent order (logos) The argument from intelligent design appears to have begun with Socrates, although the concept of a cosmic intelligence is older and David Sedley has argued that Socrates was developing an older idea, citing Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, born about 500 BC, as a possible earlier proponent.[11][12][13] The proposal that the order of nature showed evidence of having its own human-like "intelligence" goes back to the origins of Greek natural philosophy and science, and its attention to the orderliness of nature, often with special reference to the revolving of the heavens. Anaxagoras is the first person who is definitely known to have explained such a concept using the word "nous" (which is the original Greek term that leads to modern English "intelligence" via its Latin and French translations). Aristotle reports an earlier philosopher from Clazomenae named Hermotimus who had taken a similar position.[14] Amongst Pre-Socratic philosophers before Anaxagoras, other philosophers had proposed a similar intelligent ordering principle causing life and the rotation of the heavens. For example Empedocles, like Hesiod much earlier, described cosmic order and living things as caused by a cosmic version of love,[15] and Pythagoras and Heraclitus attributed the cosmos with "reason" (logos).[16] In his Philebus 28c Plato has Socrates speak of this as a tradition, saying that "all philosophers agree—whereby they really exalt themselves—that mind (nous) is king of heaven and earth. Perhaps they are right." and later states that the ensuing discussion "confirms the utterances of those who declared of old that mind (nous) always rules the universe".[17] Xenophon's report in his Memorabilia might be the earliest clear account of an argument that there is evidence in nature of intelligent design.[12] The word traditionally translated and discussed as "design" is gnome and Socrates is reported by Xenophon to have pressed doubting young men to look at things in the market, and consider whether they could tell which things showed evidence of gnome, and which seemed more to be by blind chance, and then to compare this to nature and consider whether it could be by blind chance.[11][13] In Plato's Phaedo, Socrates is made to say just before dying that his discovery of Anaxagoras' concept of a cosmic nous as the cause of the order of things, was an important turning point for him. But he also expressed disagreement with Anaxagoras' understanding of the implications of his own doctrine, because of Anaxagoras' materialist understanding of causation. Socrates complained that Anaxagoras restricted the work of the cosmic nous to the beginning, as if it were uninterested and all events since then just happened because of causes like air and water.[18] Socrates, on the other hand, apparently insisted that the demiurge must be "loving", particularly concerning humanity. (In this desire to go beyond Anaxagoras and make the cosmic nous a more active manager, Socrates was apparently preceded by Diogenes of Apollonia.[19]) Plato and Aristotle Plato's Timaeus is presented as a description of someone who is explaining a "likely story" in the form of a myth, and so throughout history commentators have disagreed about which elements of the myth can be seen as the position of Plato.[20] Sedley nevertheless calls it "the creationist manifesto" and points out that although some of Plato's followers denied that he intended it, in classical times writers such as Aristotle, Epicurus, the Stoics and Galen all understood Plato as proposing the world originated in an "intelligent creative act".[21] Plato has a character explain the concept of a "demiurge" with supreme wisdom and intelligence as the creator of the cosmos in his work . Plato's teleological perspective is also built upon the analysis of a priori order and structure in the world that he had already presented in The Republic. The story does not propose creation ex nihilo; rather, the demiurge made order from the chaos of the cosmos, imitating the eternal Forms.[22] Plato's world of eternal and unchanging Forms, imperfectly represented in matter by a divine Artisan, contrasts sharply with the various mechanistic Weltanschauungen, of which atomism was, by the 4th century at least, the most prominent... This debate was to persist throughout the ancient world. Atomistic mechanism got a shot in the arm from Epicurus... while the Stoics adopted a divine teleology... The choice seems simple: either show how a structured, regular world could arise out of undirected processes, or inject intelligence into the system.[23] —?R. J. Hankinson, Cause and Explanation in Ancient Greek Thought Plato's student and friend Aristotle (c. 384 – 322 BC), continued the Socratic tradition of criticising natural scientists such as Democritus who sought (as in modern science) to explain everything in terms of matter and chance motion. He was very influential in the future development of classical creationism, but was not a straightforward "creationist" because he required no creation interventions in nature, meaning he "insulated god from any requirement to intervene in nature, either as creator or as administrator".[24] Instead of direct intervention by a creator it is "scarcely an exaggeration to say that for Aristotle the entire functioning of the natural world, as also the heavens, is ultimately to be understood as a shared striving towards godlike actuality".[25] And whereas the myth in the Timaeus suggests that all living things are based on one single paradigm, not one for each species, and even tells a story of "devolution" whereby other living things devolved from humans, it was Aristotle who presented the influential idea that each type of normal living thing must be based on a fixed paradigm or form for that species.[13] Aristotle felt that biology was a particularly important example of a field where materialist natural science ignored information which was needed in order to understand living things well. For example birds use wings for the purpose of flight.[26] Therefore the most complete explanation in regard to the natural, as well as the artificial, is for the most part teleological.[27] In fact, proposals that species had changed by chance survival of the fittest, similar to what is now called "natural selection", were already known to Aristotle, and he rejected these with the same logic.[27][28][29][30][31] He conceded that monstrosities (new forms of life) could come about by chance,[32][33] but he disagreed with those who ascribed all nature purely to chance[34] because he believed science can only provide a general account of that which is normal, "always, or for the most part".[35] The distinction between what is normal, or by nature, and what is "accidental", or not by nature, is important in Aristotle's understanding of nature. As pointed out by Sedley, "Aristotle is happy to say (Physics II 8, 199a33-b4) without the slightest fear of blasphemy, crafts make occasional mistakes; therefore, by analogy, so can nature".[36] According to Aristotle the changes which happen by nature are caused by their "formal causes", and for example in the case of a bird's wings there is also a final cause which is the purpose of flying. He explicitly compared this to human technology: If then what comes from art is for the sake of something, it is clear that what come from nature is too [...] This is clear most of all in the other animals, which do nothing by art, inquiry, or deliberation; for which reason some people are completely at a loss whether it is by intelligence or in some other way that spiders, ants, and such things work. [...] It is absurd to think that a thing does not happen for the sake of something if we do not see what sets it in motion deliberating. [...] This is most clear when someone practices medicine himself on himself; for nature is like that. —?Aristotle, Physics, II 8.[37] The question of how to understand Aristotle's conception of nature having a purpose and direction something like human activity is controversial in the details. Martha Nussbaum for example has argued that in his biology this approach was practical and meant to show nature only being analogous to human art, explanations of an organ being greatly informed by knowledge of its essential function.[27] Nevertheless, Nussbaum's position is not universally accepted. In any case, Aristotle was not understood this way by his followers in the Middle Ages, who saw him as consistent with monotheistic religion and a teleological understanding of all nature. Consistent with the medieval interpretation, in his Metaphysics and other works Aristotle clearly argued a case for their being one highest god or "prime mover" which was the ultimate cause, though specifically not the material cause, of the eternal forms or natures which cause the natural order, including all living things. And he clearly refers to this entity having an intellect that humans somehow share in, which helps humans see the true natures or forms of things without relying purely on sense perception of physical things, including living species. This understanding of nature, and Aristotle's arguments against materialist understandings of nature, were very influential in the Middle Ages in Europe. The idea of fixed species remained dominant in biology until Darwin, and a focus upon biology is still common today in teleological criticisms of modern science. Roman era It was the Stoics who "developed the battery of creationist arguments broadly known under the label 'The Argument from Design'".[6] Cicero (c. 106 – c. 43 BC) reported the teleological argument of the Stoics in De Natura Deorum (On the Nature of the Gods) Book II, which includes an early version of the watchmaker analogy, which was later developed by William Paley. He has one of the characters in the dialogue say: When you see a sundial or a water-clock, you see that it tells the time by design and not by chance. How then can you imagine that the universe as a whole is devoid of purpose and intelligence, when it embraces everything, including these artifacts themselves and their artificers? —?Cicero, De Natura Deorum, II.34 Another very important classical supporter of the teleological argument was Galen, whose compendious works were one of the major sources of medical knowledge until modern times, both in Europe and the medieval Islamic world. He was not a Stoic, but like them he looked back to the Socratics and was constantly engaged in arguing against atomists such as the Epicureans. Unlike Aristotle (who was however a major influence upon him), and unlike the Neoplatonists, he believed there was really evidence for something literally like the "demiurge" found in Plato's Timaeus, which worked physical upon nature. In works such as his On the Usefulness of Parts he explained evidence for it in the complexity of animal construction. His work shows "early signs of contact and contrast between the pagan and the Judaeo-Christian tradition of creation", criticizing the account found in the Bible. "Moses, he suggests, would have contented himself with saying that God ordered the eyelashes not to grow and that they obeyed. In contrast to this, the Platonic tradition's Demiurge is above all else a technician." Surprisingly, neither Aristotle nor Plato, but Xenophon are considered by Galen, as the best writer on this subject. Galen shared with Xenophon a scepticism of the value of books about most speculative philosophy, except for inquiries such as whether there is "something in the world superior in power and wisdom to man". This he saw as having an everyday importance, a usefulness for living well. He also asserted that Xenophon was the author who reported the real position of Socrates, including his aloofness from many types of speculative science and philosophy.[38] Galen's connection of the teleological argument to discussions about the complexity of living things, and his insistence that this is possible for a practical scientist, foreshadows some aspects of modern uses of the teleological argument. Medieval philosophy and theology Late classical Christian writers As an appeal to general revelation, Paul the Apostle (AD 5–67), argues in Romans 1:18–20[1:18–20], that because it has been made plain to all from what has been created in the world, it is obvious that there is a God.[39] Marcus Minucius Felix (c. late 2nd to 3rd century), an Early Christian writer, argued for the existence of God based on the analogy of an ordered house in his The Orders of Minucius Felix: "Supposing you went into a house and found everything neat, orderly and well-kept, surely you would assume it had a master, and one much better than the good things, his belongings; so in this house of the universe, when throughout heaven and earth you see the marks of foresight, order and law, may you not assume that the lord and author of the universe is fairer than the stars themselves or than any portions of the entire world ?"[40] Augustine of Hippo (AD 354–430) in The City of God mentioned the idea that the world's "well-ordered changes and movements", and "the fair appearance of all visible things" was evidence for the world being created, and "that it could not have been created save by God".[41] Islamic philosophy Early Islamic philosophy played an important role in developing the philosophical understandings of God among Jewish and Christian thinkers in the Middle Ages, but concerning the teleological argument one of the lasting effects of this tradition came from its discussions of the difficulties which this type of proof has. Various forms of the argument from design have been used by Islamic theologians and philosophers from the time of the early Mutakallimun theologians in the 9th century, although it is rejected by fundamentalist or literalist schools, for whom the mention of God in the Qu'ran should be sufficient evidence. The argument from design was also seen as an unconvincing sophism by the early Islamic philosopher Al-Farabi, who instead took the "emanationist" approach of the Neoplatonists such as Plotinus, whereby nature is rationally ordered, but God is not like a craftsman who literally manages the world. Later, Avicenna was also convinced of this, and proposed instead a cosmological argument for the existence of God.[42] The argument was however later accepted by both the Aristotelian philosopher Averroes (Ibn Rushd) and his great anti-philosophy opponent Al-Ghazali. Averroes' term for the argument was Dalil al-?inaya, which can be translated as "argument from providence". Both of them however accepted the argument because they believed it is explicitly mentioned in the Quran.[43] Despite this, like Aristotle, the Neoplatonists, and Al-Farabi, Averroes proposed that order and continual motion in the world is caused by God's intellect. Whether Averroes was an "emanationist" like his predecessors has been a subject of disagreement and uncertainty. But it is generally agreed that what he adapted from those traditions, agreed with them about the fact that God does not create in the same way as a craftsman.[44][45] In fact then, Averroes treated the teleological argument as one of two "religious" arguments for the existence of God. The principal demonstrative proof is, according to Averroes, Aristotle's proof from motion in the universe that there must be a first mover which causes everything else to move.[46] Averroes' position that the most logically valid proof should be physical rather than metaphysical (because then metaphysics would be proving itself) was in conscious opposition to the position of Avicenna. Later Jewish and Christian philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas were aware of this debate, and generally took a position closer to Avicenna. Jewish philosophy An example of the teleological argument in Jewish philosophy appears when the medieval Aristotelian philosopher Maimonides cites the passage in Isaiah 40:26, where the "Holy One" says: "Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number:"[47] However, Barry Holtz calls this "a crude form of the argument from design", and that this "is only one possible way of reading the text". He asserts that "Generally, in the biblical texts the existence of God is taken for granted."[48] Maimonides also recalled that Abraham (in the midrash, or explanatory text, of Genesis Rabbah 39:1) recognized the existence of "one transcendent deity from the fact that the world around him exhibits an order and design".[49] The midrash makes an analogy between the obviousness that a building has an owner, and that the world is looked after by God. Abraham says "Is it conceivable that the world is without a guide?"[50] Because of these examples, the 19th century philosopher Nachman Krochmal called the argument from design "a cardinal principle of the Jewish faith


nude bikini pics clinton photos chelsea pictures desnuda fotos naked laura porn free porno fan and linda video site lisa kelly playboy topless lolo joan xxx official sex traci ferrari lords eva photo the nue tube pic videos sexy smith ana leah welch lovelace you remini club loren giacomo karen elizabeth carangi fake julia trinity ava kate fenech dana pozzi images gallery edwige moana victoria kristel joanna pornstar foto sylvia rachel pamela principal clips movies lauren shania valerie fabian collins nia rio del robin rhodes hart jane stevens measurements susan taylor jenny sanchez moore lane antonelli lancaume nancy roselyn emily hartley boobs brooke angie kim web demi bonet carrie allen grant hot esther deborah with braga jones fansite yates freeones
lee heather tina inger severance christina louise lopez gina wallpaper nacked ann film nackt fisher carey corinne shue ass vancamp clery model shannon elisabeth panties biografia angelina sofia erin monroe dazza charlene janet doris vanessa anna belinda reguera diane paula fucking scene peeples sonia shauna autopsy monica sharon patricia alicia plato bardot
melissa movie picture cynthia nicole maria star nina julie mary gemser naomi williams torrent nuda barbara twain anderson gia nudes fakes larue pussy actress upskirt san raquel jennifer tits mariah meg sandra big michelle roberts marie lumley tewes clip salma vergara jada cristal day shields cassidy sandrelli penthouse dickinson goldie nud angel brigitte drew fucked amanda shemale olivia website milano ellen ellison vidcaps hayek stone download carmen bessie swimsuit vera zeta locklear shirley anal gray cindy marilyn connie kayla sucking streep cock jensen john tiffani stockings hawn for weaver rue barrymore catherine bellucci rebecca bondage feet applegate jolie sigourney wilkinson nipples juliet revealing teresa magazine kennedy ashley what bio biography agutter wood her jordan hill com jessica pornos blowjob
lesbian nued grace hardcore regera palmer asia theresa leeuw heaton juhi alyssa pinkett rene actriz black vicky jamie ryan gillian massey short shirtless scenes maggie dreyfus lynne mpegs melua george thiessen jean june crawford alex natalie bullock playmate berry andrews maren kleevage quennessen pix hair shelley tiffany gunn galleries from russo dhue lebrock leigh fuck stefania tilton laurie russell vids bessie swimsuit vera zeta shirley locklear anal gray cindy marilyn connie kayla sucking streep cock jensen john tiffani stockings hawn for weaver rue catherine barrymore bellucci rebecca bondage feet applegate jolie george thiessen jean june crawford alex sigourney wilkinson nipples juliet revealing teresa magazine kennedy ashley what bio biography agutter jordan wood her hill com jessica pornos blowjob lesbian nued grace
hardcore regera palmer asia theresa leeuw heaton juhi alyssa pinkett rene actriz black vicky rutherford lohan winslet spungen shawnee swanson newton hannah leslie silverstone did frann wallpapers kidman louis kristy valeria lang fiorentino deanna rita hillary katie granny girls megan tori paris arquette amber sue escort chawla dorothy jessie anthony courtney shot sites kay meryl judy candice desnudo wallace gertz show teen savannah busty schneider glass thong spears young erika aniston stiles capshaw loni imagenes von myspace jena daryl girl hotmail nicola savoy
garr bonnie sexe play adriana donna angelique love actor mitchell unger sellecca adult hairstyles malone teri hayworth lynn harry kara rodriguez films welles peliculas kaprisky uschi blakely halle lindsay miranda jami jamie ryan gillian massey short scenes shirtless maggie dreyfus lynne mpegs melua natalie bullock playmate berry andrews maren kleevage quennessen pix hair shelley tiffany gunn








www.shanagrant.com

Shauna Grant The Last Porn Queen