40 Cards in this Set
| Front | Back |
|---|---|
|
Objection of Cosmological events
|
events can outlast the causes
|
|
Teleological Arg't
( Arg't for design)
|
A Posteriori
everything was brought about, and there is a cause behind them
*a design behind all of it, intricate in relative respects
|
|
Objection to Design Argument
|
Even IF the arguments showed that the universe is the product of design, they show nothing about the nature of evolution
|
|
Resemblance in the relative respect
|
the way designers relate to each other
|
|
what keeps the "big bang theory" from being a designer?
|
it is not conscious
|
|
Design Argument 1 Premise 1
|
1. The human eye is like a watch. It has complex parts which interact to achieve a particular result.
|
|
ontological argument
|
An argument for the existence of God. Attempts the method of a priori proof. It offers that God exists because the concept/definition/idea of God necessarily supports the existence of God
|
|
Anselm defines God as
|
that being than which no greater can be conceived
|
|
Teleological Argument
|
Reality seems to have a design to it. Such a complex design requires a designer
|
|
Cosmological argument (argument of causation)
|
A Posteriori
Efficient causes cannot be infinite and something cannot cause itself therefore there must have been first efficient cause and everyone calls this God
Everything is caused
nothing can be the cause of itself
there can't be an infinite regress of cause
therefore there must…
|
|
reductio ad absurdum
|
reduction to the absurd
|
|
anselm's ontological argument
|
1. by definition, god is the greatest possible being
2. existence in reality and in the mind is greater than existing just in the mind
so, if god existed only in the mind he wouldn't be as great as if he existed in reality too
so if god existed only in the mind he wouldn't be the g…
|
|
Lost Island Objection to ontological argument
|
Guanilo's objection to Anselm where he says to think of the most perfect island (greatest that can be conceived) that can possibly exist, since you are thinking of it, it must exist.
|
|
Anselm's response to the lost island objection
|
He says everyone has there own opinion of a perfect island.
|
|
Argument that existence is not a great-making property
|
you can conceive an evil person (Hitler) and it is better if he exist in the understanding then the reality.
|
|
Kant's Objection to Ontological Argument
|
Existence is not a property or predicate, it is a typical example in the world. It can't be in the context of any feature
|
|
The Problem of Evil Argument
|
1) If god exists, he who is all-good and all-powerful.
2) If god is all good, then he would want to eliminate any suffering or evil he could.
3) If god is all powerful, then he could eliminate any suffering or evil
4) Therefore, if god exists, there would be no suffering.
5) But there…
|
|
Moral Evil vs Natural Evil
|
Moral evil is created by people.
Natural evil includes any type of evil which is not created by people.
|
|
Moral Evil
|
Personal evil chosen by humans
ex) Murder, Abuse, Manipulation
|
|
Case of Dog Boy
|
Wealthy General who has slaves tend to property. And have young slaves to attend to the dogs. (Dog Boys) General has a prized hound. The general is away. And the dog boys play with dogs. A dog is injured and the General has the Dog Boy locked away alone in a shed for the night. Next day, …
|
|
Consequentialism
|
a theory that holds the rightness or wrongness of an act depends entirely on consequences
|
|
Non-consequentialism
|
Considers Intentions, looks at means rather than ends.
|
|
Dostoeuski's view on interpreting evil (Objection to Soul Making Theodicy)
|
You cant use people as a means to the consequence of natural evils. It is inherently wrong.
|
|
Free-Will Defense
|
It is logically impossible for God to create free creatures and guarantee that they will never do evil.
It is a good thing to create free creatures who are morally responsible agents,
but there is no assurance that they will not also do evil.
-------------------
god must exist if e…
|
|
Objection to the free-will defense
|
It is possible to have free will and not choose evil.
Even if free will explains moral evil, it doesn’t explain natural evil.
|
|
Hick's Soul Making Theodicy
|
God wants us to struggle in the world because he is more concerned with growing us into morally virtuous ppl than making us comfortable
evil is justified since it sets the stage for spiritual development and real communication with God
Natural Evils are necessary for opportunities of so…
|
|
Edward's response to Cosmological Argument
|
there must be a first 'uncaused' cause for a regression of causes. there can't be an infinite regress because you will take away the 'uncaused' cause
|
|
Pascal Wager
|
Cant prove existence of God, but belief in him is a good bet infinite to be gained. If you do not believe in god it is finite
*practical reasoning
|
|
Objection for Practical reason
|
belief is much different because when you believe in god you believe it to be true. on the basis of practical reason you cant truly believe it to be true
|
|
Philosophy of religion
|
God is an omnipotent perfectly good being
|
|
Camus(ka-moo)
|
believed biggest philisophical question was to be or not to be(lucid vs suicide)
|
|
Absurdity of life
|
Appeal- Judge what you are doing as valuable religious, and morals
Suicide- no value in life
Living Lucidly with the fact their is no meaning to our lives, not giving up
|
|
Camus Opinion on Absurdity of life
|
Believes that response cause one to live in authenticity, not lucid
Do not believe on giving up
not giving up
|
|
Panning out Experiment
|
Life wasn't meaningful, are lives have no significant impact
|
|
Tolstoys Travelar-Bear
|
responsibility of adulthood
|
|
Tolstoys Traveler- Beast
|
Represents inevitable death
|
|
Tolstoys Traveler-Twig
|
Fragility of Life
|
|
Tolstoys Traveler-Mouse
|
time passing by
|
|
Tolstoys Traveler-Honesy
|
Happiness
|
|
Atheist Two Thesis
|
It is more important to be free and autonomous that
religion provides a grand meaning or purpose to life, but it does not allow humans to be free or autonomous
|
PHIL 100: EXAM 3