Antony Flew: The Existence and Belief Of God Essay -- Philosopher Anto

Antony Flew: The Existence and Belief of God Antony Flew starts by telling the audience this story of two explorers that accidentally came upon a garden in a jungle. In this garden, there were many beautiful flowers and weeds. One explorer says, "some gardener must tend this plot". While the other disagrees, "there is no gardener". So, these two explorers tried to figure out who was right and who was wrong. They waited the whole night, but no gardener was ever seen. Then the "Believer" said that there must be a gardener, that he "is an invisible gardener". He tried everything he could to convince to the "Sceptic" that he was right, barbed-wire, electrifying fence, patrolling bloodhounds. But no gardener was ever found. Still the "Believer" was not convinced. He gave the "Sceptic" many excuses as to why they couldn't see the gardener. The "Sceptic" told him that he was crazy because what started out as a simple assertion that there was a gardener, turned into "an imaginary gardener".   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  This parable that Flew is using is clearly an analogy to the existence and belief of God. The garden represents God, "†¦invisible, intangible, insensible†¦". The "Sceptic" says there is no gardener, just as an atheist denies the existence God. The "Believer" says there is a gardener, like a theist telling everyone that God exists. The "Believer" tries to prove that there was a planter, who planted the seeds for the flowers to grow. This planter takes care of them, a parallelism to God supposedly taking care of "us".   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Flew talks about assertions. He states that "what starts as an assertion, that something exists†¦may be reduced step by step to an altogether different status". He uses the example of how if one man were to talk about sexual behavior, "another man prefers to talk of Aphrodite". They don't seem to make sense. How can one confuse the idea of a sexual behavior with Aphrodite? He also points out the fact that "a fine brash hypothesis may be killed by inches, the death of a thousand qualifications". A good example of this is when he said that "God loves us as a father loves his children". He states that when we see a child dying of cancer, his "earthy father" is there, to help him, nurture him, trying his best for his son. But his "Heavenly Father", God, is no where to be found, that he "reveals no obvious sign of concern". The... ...arden in which I find myself, that I am unable to share the explorers' detachment," said Hare. He tried to point out that if he was in the same situation, he would not share the same views as the explorers. Which is a belief in the g ardener, a belief in God. Both of these man had some strong viewpoints. Flew states, if one asserts something, then one must deny something. What Hare is trying to say is that, there is two sides to every idea or "assertions", a blik. That that is a sane blik and a insane blik. Most people have the sane one and those who don't share this view is point as lunatics. But no one is not trying to deny something here. The person with the insane blik is not wrong or that he's not trying to deny something, it's just that his views are different. Flew states, "what would have to occur or to have occurred to constitute for you a disproof of the love of, or of the existence of, God?" Hare's reply to this question is that he calls this "completely victorious." Nothing have to occur because those who does not share this belief in God have an insane blik. They are not trying to deny that God doesn't but rather that they views are just different.