Arguments for the existence of god

Question 1

What is an a posteriori argument?

Answer 1

• an argument based on our experience of the world around us. uses evidence , sense experience to make its points. it is empirical in nature.

Question 2

What is an a priori argument?

Answer 2

• an argument that is not dependant on external evidence or experience. to reach the answer.

Question 3

What is inductive proof?

Answer 3

• A set of premisies that move towards a conclusion that is not logically necesary, but only probable.
• the conclusion of the peoof is not constained withing the premises (synthetic)
• (a posteriori) because the premise and conclusion are dependant on external evidence.
• premises support but are not contained in the conclusion

Question 4

What is deductive proof?

Answer 4

• A set of premises that move towards a logically necesarry conclusion.
• does not conclude anything that is not already contained in the original premises (analytic)
• A priori because the conclusion is not dependant on external evidence or experience.

Question 5

What is a synthetic and analytic argument?

Answer 5

• synthetic the argument is not true or false by the definition of its premises it has to be testes
• analytic the argument is true or false based on its premises ne exterbal proof is needed.

Question 6

What did cicero say that could be used in reference to the design argument?

Answer 6

‘what could be more clear hwen we look up to sky and contemplate the heavens than there is some divinity or intelligence’

Question 7

What is the design argument?

Answer 7

A teleological argument that is the calim that the appearance of design in nature such as the complexity and intricacy of organisms can only be explained by the existence of a designer.

Question 8

What is Paley’s watch in reference to the design argument?

Answer 8

• ‘for every indication of contiunace , every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch there exists in the works of nature,’
• if we came across a watch on the ground we would be inclined to think that it was placed there fro some reason and that it was designed, not forever existing, because its very complex. this is the same for lufe and the world.
• but because the universe is vastly more coplex and gigantic than a human creation is, there must be a powerfull and intelligent designer.

Question 9

What type of argument is paleys watch?/ the design argument?

Answer 9

• a posteriori beacused they are based on our experince of the world around us
• this means that it only shows that God existence is probable, not determined.
• synthetic as the conclusion (that god exists) is not contained in the premises.

Question 10

What are hume’s crtisisms of the design argument?

Answer 10

• the cause of design needs only to be proportionate to its effect. even if the unvierse was designed we cant guarantee it was the god of classical theism.
• the existence of evil and imperfection in the world suggests a limited designer
• arguments between the universe and machines are flawed, the universe is more like a vegetable, who design and reproduce themselves.
• the unvierse couldve developed into a comparitvley orederd state simply by choice
• any analogy btween the designers of human machines and the universe is anthropomorphism.

Question 11

What are the strenghts of Paley’s design argument?

Answer 11

• arguing that the designer is the christian god may be right to arugue because this is the simplest explanation. ‘simplicity is always evidence for truth’ it makes sense.
• evolution does not destroy the design argument because evolution does not explain itself and evolution is compatible with beleif in go anyway.
• ## the designer is metaphysical and transcendant the designer must be metaphysical because it would be impossible to design such a system from the inside.

Question 12

What are the weaknesses of Paley’s design argument?

Answer 12

1. even if the universe was designed, the all-powerful Christian god is a greater cause than needed to account for that design.
2. the existence of evil is a powerful argument against the existence of the all-loving and powerful god.
3. hume’s argument that the universe is more like a vegetable than a machine is backed up by evolution
4. We have no experience of human making, so our ideas about it are anthropomorphic, meaning we derive them from our limited experiences.
5. if nature can design itself as evolution supports, then hume is probably right that the universe designed itself.

Question 13

Define the word ‘contingent’

Answer 13

• beings or things are dependent for their existence on other beings (or things)

Question 14

Define the word ‘necessary’

Answer 14

• something that has to exist
• something which all contingent beings rely on for their existence

Question 15

Define the phrase ‘Infinite regress’

Answer 15

• A chain of causes and effects going infinitely back in time with no beginning

Question 16

What two presumptions did Aquinas base his cosmological argument on?

Answer 16

• the universe exists.
• so there must be a reason why

Question 17

What is the cosmological argument?

Answer 17

• Aquinas argued that everything in the cosmos has a cause and if we track things through a series of causes, there must have been a first cause.
• this first cause is God, who he describes as a ‘necessary being’ transcendent and eternal.

Question 18

What is Aquinas’ first way?

Answer 18

• the argument from motion.
• everything in the world is moving or changing and nothing can move or change by itself.
• there cannot be an infinite regress of things changing or moving other things
• therefore there must be a prime mover. this is god.

Question 19

What is Aquinas’ second way?

Answer 19

• the argument from causation
• everything in the world has a cause and nothing is the cause of itself
• there cannot be an infinite regress of causes
• therefore there has to be a first cause. this is God

Question 20

What is Aquinas’ third way?

Answer 20

• The argument from contingency
• everything in the world is contingent
• if things can not exist there must’ve been a time when they did not exist.
  -if everything could not exist then there must’ve been a time when nothing existed
• and since nothing can arise out of nothing.
• things must exist now because of some necessary being that brought them into existence. this necessary being we call god.

Question 21

What important points did copleston make in his debate with Russel?

Answer 21

• it is reasonable to suggest god exists
• it is reasonable to ask how the universe began
• the universe is contingent
• contingent things require an explanation
• infinite regress is not an explanation
• therefore an entity that is not contingent but necessary is needed to explain the universe.

Question 22

What is Russell’s 1st Criticism of copleston?

Answer 22

• the fallacy of composition is a fallacy of inferring that something is true for the whole from the fact that it is true for part of the whole or every part of the whole. Russel argues Aquinas’s first way commits the fallacy of composition

Question 23

What is Russell’s 2nd criticism of copleston?

Answer 23

• Russell rejects the claim that any being can be necessary.
  -the regress of casual events cannot be held responsible for the existence of the universe
  -refuses the notion of a necessary being as one who cannot be thought of as not existing.

Question 24

What is Russell’s 3rd criticism of copleston?

Answer 24

• the universe exists as a brute fact and not due to a necessary being
• the universe is a brute fact of which its existence does not require an explanation.
• ‘i should say the universe is just there, that’s all’

Question 25

What quote did Russell say?

Answer 25

‘what i am saying is that the concept of cause is not applicable to the total.’

Question 26

What is the ontological argument in terms of types of argument?

Answer 26

• ontological means ‘concerned with being’
• the argument is deductive
• its premises are a priori
• it focuses on the concept of god.

Question 27

Why is the ontological argument a priori?

Answer 27

Because it doesn’t depend on any type of experience.

Question 28

What is the ontological argument?

Answer 28

• just by thinking about what god is we can conclude that god must exist.
• god exists by definiton as existence is a defining charicteristic of god
• there ore god cannot possibly be non-existent
• people who think god cannot exist clearly do not undertsnad the meaning of ‘god’.

Question 29

What is anselms first form?

Answer 29

• god is the greatest possible being and nothing greater can be concieved (premise 1)
• if god exists in the mind alone (only as an idea) then a greater being could be imagined to exist, both in the mind and reality (premise 2)
• this being would be greater than god. thus God cannot only exist as an indea in the mind. (premise 3)
• therefore, god ,must exist both in the mind, as an idea, and in reality. (premise 4)
• the idea of a greater being necessitates the existence of such a being otherwise it would not be the greatest at all. (conclusion)

Question 30

\What quote from anslem can be used to back the ontological argument up?

Answer 30

“you exist so truly my lord that yoy cannot be thought not to exist”

Question 31

How did Gaunlio challange the first form of the onltogical argument?

Answer 31

• ‘If you concieve of the greatest of anything then it seems that it must have to exist, on the grounds that it is greater to exist in reality that in the mind only”
• He used the example of ‘the gratest concievable lost island’ and contended that by anslems’s reasoning the lost island must exist
• since we can’t prove that this island does or does not exist anslems argument must be flawed.

Question 32

What is Anslem’s second form?

Answer 32

• in reply to gaunlio’s critisism
• God is a different order of being, there are two types of existence : existence that can fail to be (contingent existence) and existence that cannot fail to be (nesesary existence)
• God cannot come and go out of existence. its impossible to concieve of god as not existing. he has necessary existence.

Question 33

What is the final conclusion of the ontological argument?

Answer 33

• God is entirely independant of the processes of time and space. he is a necesarry, not contingent being - if this were not the case then we would be able to concieve of something greater than god. but we cant.

Question 34

What are gaunilo’s crtisisms of the ontological argument?

Answer 34

• He argues that we cannot move from a definiton of god to a claim that he exists. we have an understanding of many things, but this does not mean they exist.
• he again uses the idea of an island to illustrate his ideas.
• simply put, someone can tell us to imagine a perfect island. if the person told us that the island exists we could understand them.
• but if this person told us that the island has to exist in reality because if it did not it would not be a perfect island, we would think that they are a fool.
• gaunilo also argues that the fact that the fool dismisses the existence of god shows that there are differnt ways of understanding god, meaning that anslem is wrong to say that we all undertstand god to be “the greatest concievable being”

Question 35

How did descartes describe the ontological argument?

Answer 35

• defined god as the supremely perfect being meaning that god must posses at the perfect predicates such as omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence and so on. in additon god must therefore posses the perfection of existence.

Question 36

How did Kant object descartes ontological argument?

Answer 36

• existence is not a real predicate, because it adds nothing to the concept of a thing, real predicates give new knowledge of a subject.

Question 37

How does Kants rejection of the ontological argument apply to Anslems concept of god?

Answer 37

• Anslem tells us that god is the greatst concievable being, so we can imagine god with all the predicates that descartes list, and each predicate: omnipotence, onmiscience, omnibenevolence, and so on, adds to our concept of god. but then if i say ‘oh, and by the way god exists’, nothing has been added to our concept of god and our concept of a god that exists. similary we need sense experience to know if god really exists. in kants example of the thalers.

Question 38

What are the strenghts of the ontological argument?

Answer 38

• the argument is deductive , so if it works it is a proof.
• according to karl barth the argument succeeds because its no meant to be a logical proof : its a confession of faith.
• for those with faith, the ontological argument is clear testament to their faith

Question 39

what are the weaknesses of the ontological argument?

Answer 39

• most agree that kants objections defeat the arguments of the ontological argument. they donot disprove the existence of god but sshow that gods existence cannot be shown with logic.
• some reject anslem’s definition of god as ‘the greatest concievable being’ but christians such as aquinas would reject any attempt to define god, because if we were able to define him that would limit him.