Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

OCR Philosophy > Arguments From Observation > Flashcards

Arguments From Observation Flashcards

1
Q

What is Aquinas’ first way? Reasoning?

A
  1. All things are in a state of change.
  2. Everything is a secondary mover.
  3. If all things are secondary movers then there must be infinite regress.
  4. If the above is correct then there is no Prime Mover. Without a Prime Mover, there can be no secondary movers, therefore, the point above is false as infinite regress is impossible. (The reductio ad absurdum technique.)
  5. Therefore, there must be a prime mover. This we call “God”.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is Aquinas’ second way?

A
  1. There is an order of efficient causes.
  2. No efficient cause can cause itself.
  3. If there is infinite regress then there is no First Cause.
  4. If the point above is true then there can be no subsequent causes. Infinite regress is impossible. (The reductio ad absurdum technique.)
  5. Therefore there must be a first cause of everything. This we call “God”.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is Aquinas’ third way?

A

(1) Things are contingent.
(2) If everything is contingent, there must have been a time when nothing existed.
(3) Therefore (using reductio ad absurdum) nothing can come from nothing.
(4) Therefore, there must be a necessary being.
(5) Every necessary being must have a cause either inside or outside of itself.
(6) Imagine every necessary being had a cause outside itself.
(7) Therefore (using reductio ad absurdum) if (6) is true, then there is no ultimate cause of necessity.
(8) Therefore, there must be a necessary being which causes and contains all other necessary and contingent beings. This being we call “God”.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

When was Aquinas alive?

A

1224-1274

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is the issue with infinite regress for Aquinas’ argument?

A

Why can’t we have one? For example the theory of the Big Bang has variations that look at rebound universes that would allow for infinite regression on a universal scale. It is a logical leap to say that a Prime Mover makes more sense than an infinite regress - it is either that or the limitations of human thought.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

How is there an issue with the image of God? (cosmological)

A

It does not prove the god of classical theism, only a first cause that could be anything. A monolith a pantheon etc.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is the issue with God being the exception? (cosmological)

A

Could the universe not be the exception? The uncaused causer.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

How does Quantum physics lead to a lack of causation? (cosmological)

A

Quantum particles do not always have causes for their wave function collapses, theories such as Schrödinger’s for example allow for this.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What is the issue with infinite regress for contingency?

A

Why can’t there be overlapping contingent beings going back to infinity? This is a fallacy.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Criticism about the point of cosmological arguments?

A

Is there a point in knowing what caused everything, this does not aid us on a day to day level.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What is Hume’s first criticism of the cosmological argument?

A

Just bc we can observe cause and effect in the universe does not mean that this rule applies to the universe itself….The Fallacy of composition…what is true for the parts is not always true for the whole.
This is the fallacy of affirmation and consequent.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

How does Mackie agree with the criticisms by Hume of the cosmological argument?

A

Why should people accept that God is a necessary being?

He argued that there is a ‘permanent stock of matter whose essence did not involve existence from anything else’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

How can we criticize the cosmological argument through its language? Who said this?

A

Analytical and Synthetic statements (reason- true by definition….or you need to prove the statement with outside information)
Bertrand Russell said that only analytical statements are necessary not any being such as God. This is bc a being is not self-explanatory and therefore evidence must be found exterior to Aquinas’ reasoning.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What is the issue with trying to explain things with the cosmological argument?

A

Why are we looking for an explanation of the universe and not an explanation for God. Why can’t the universe be the unexplained reason for our existence?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What scientific theories should you use to criticize the cosmological argument?

A
  • the big bang (+ rebound universes)
  • types of infinity
  • steady state theory (Bondi, Gold and Hoyle…energy cannot be created…entropy etc)
  • Quantum mechanics
  • Background radiation
  • Red shift

(Remember some of these are just theories)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What is Leibniz’ defense of the cosmological arguement?

A

The argument from sufficient reason.

Everything in the world is so amazing and the cause can be no greater than the effect. The effect is amazing and so must be the causer.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What is Copleston’s support of the cosmological argument?

A

Contingency…objects in the world depend on something for their existence therefore what caused everything in the universe must be external to the universe. And this being must be self-explanatory and ‘necessary’, giving the definition to everything else.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What is Russel’s quote that demonstrates the fallacy of composition?

A

“every man that exists has a mother…therefore the human race must have a mother”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What is Hume’s second criticism of the cosmological argument?

A

We can talk about things we have done ourselves with certainty but we have no knowledge of creating the universe and therefore cannot make assumptions about it. There being a cause of the universe can be neither proven nor established.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What is Hume’s third criticism of the cosmological argument?

A

Even if we accept God as the first cause we cannot prove that it is the classical God of theism. It could actually be a pantheon or a monolith.
This is an inductive leap as it does not link with the premises. We cannot conclude from speculation.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What is a fallacy of composition?

A

a mistaken belief based on unsound reasoning that makes that argument invalid.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What is Hume’s twenty particle explanation of the cosmological criticism?

A

If you find an explanation for the particle individually it would be wrong to then reason the function of them as a collective. Knowing everything about bosons, neutrons etc…cannot tell you it is an organ.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

How can Aquinas be linked to Aristotle?

A

The process of going through the stages of actuality to potentiality. This is the form of motion that draws us towards our telos and so fits with the first way.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What is a Cosmological Argument?

A

A classical argument for the existence of God, it is based on a belief that there is a first cause behind the existence of the universe

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What kind of reasoning is the Cosmological Argument?

A

A posterior - it derives the conclusion that God exists from a posterior premise because it is based on what can be seen in the world and the universe

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

What kind of reasoning is the teleological arguement?

A

A posteriori - we are looking to the world for evidence of purpose

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What is design qua purpose?

A

The world has patterns and organisation in it
Everything is designed for a purpose otherwise it would not have been designed in the first place
Anything that is designed must have a designer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

How does Pailey account for evil in the world?

A

Even if a watch is not working it still shows evidence of design

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

How is Paley making a logical leap when comparing the eye to the world?

A

They are not really comparable, much like the conclusion of Hume’s house analogy, we can see the workers or the dna that have made up these structures…but we cannot make that leap as we cannot see the makers of this universe.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

How does Paley link the watchmaker to God?

A

Nature must have the highest complexity, perfection and skilled of designers because it is the most complex of all designs

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

What is the order of Paley’s argument?

A
  1. design qua purpose
  2. the watch analogy
  3. reasoning towards God
  4. design qua regularity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Aquinas quote about design?

A

Everything operates as to a design. This design is from God.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Which if Paley’s arguments fits with Aquinas’ views?

A

Design qua regualarity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

How does Aquinas reason the presence of design qua regularity?

A
  1. objects follow natural laws, have a telos
  2. when something works efficiently this is bc they have been designed
  3. everything designed must have a designer
  4. arrow analogy, everything that cannot think for itself in the natural world must be directed
  5. This is God
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Dawkin’s quote from the blind watchmaker about teleology?

A

No purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind and pitiless indifference.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

What is Hume’s second argument against teleology?

A

The Epicurean thought hypothesis…
If we accept there is design…but that we cannot know what God is

At the begging of the universe time particles were in chaotic, random motion and evolved into an ordered system….therefore design happened over time - not via a designer. (2nd law of thermodynamics?)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

Who is Paley responding to?

A

Hume (24 years earlier)

38
Q

What are the main examples to use to support the evolutionary argument?

A
  • the laryngeal nerve in a giraffe
  • the appendix
  • Darwin’s finches
39
Q

How can we criticize the teleology through the qualities of God?

A

Why would God design a world like this?
Dawkins points out about female digger worms (laying in alive caterpillars)
Stephen Fry’s condemnation of a capricious God that gives bone cancer to children

40
Q

How can we argue about cancer when it comes to teleology?

A

In one way God is the archer directing this arrow but we can also argue that cancer is merely fulfilling its purpose…but then surely it should never have been created if its purpose is suffering and misery…perhaps this is better explained via biology…etc

41
Q

How does the aesthetic argument go against evolution? (Tennant) and counterargue this?

A

Why do we appreciate beauty and art if it is not necessary to survival?

It is needed for the purposes of motivation and the more complex processes of dopamine aiding the functioning of the brain and even increasing the lifespan of individuals who have higher levels.

42
Q

How does Dawkins argue against the Aesthetic argument?

A

Family and social groups enable better chances of survival…the memes of beauty and culture aid this.

43
Q

How can we defend design with the set up of the universe?

A

Earth is in a Goldilocks zone in the solar system that allows for life (91-93 million miles away)

But there are many planets that are in goldilocks zones that have either not developed life like us or at least demonstrate a creator is not solely focused on humanity. (eg, Kepler-186f)

44
Q

What is a logical fallacy?

A

an error in logic or reasoning

45
Q

What is teleology?

A

an explanation by reference

46
Q

What is a telos?

A

a purpose

47
Q

What is teleology?

A

an explanation by reference

48
Q

Who was the first to contemplate design theory?

A

Cicero said “what could be more clear and obvious when we look up into the sky and contemplate the heavens than there is some divinity or superior intelligence.”

49
Q

What are Aquinas’ 5 Ways?

A
  1. Motion
  2. Causation
  3. Contingency
  4. Degrees
  5. Ends
50
Q

What is the Motion argument?

A

There is a movement that started all movement. God is the un-moved mover.

  1. everything moves
  2. Everything has a mover
  3. Nothing moves independently
    c. there must be a first mover that moves everything
51
Q

What is the Causation argument?

A

That there is a first cause that started the chain of cause and effect. God is the uncaused-causer.

  1. Everything has a causer
  2. Infinite regress is impossible
    c. therefore there has to be a first cause
52
Q

What is the contingency argument?

A

The ability to distinguish between possible and necessary beings

53
Q

What is the argument from degrees?

A

Degrees of perfection are allowed because there is something to compare to it.

54
Q

What is the argument from ends?

A

Some things need to be directed towards their telos.

55
Q

What is Aquinas’ example of the archer? What is this an example of?

A

That like the archer needs to direct his arrows towards their target, so must ‘natural bodies’ towards their telos. This is an example of ‘regularity of succession’ (everything in nature follows laws that leas to certain results being achieved)

56
Q

What is a design qua regularity argument?

A

that the universe works according to laws

57
Q

What is Pailey’s watch analogy?

A

A man comes across a stone and a watch
He concludes that the stone must have always been there and does not have a fixed purpose
However he concludes that the watch must have been designed as it has a fixed purpose and complexity (by a watchmaker…not God yet)

And in this same way Pailey argued that the word must have beened designed due to its complexity.

58
Q

What is the eye and planets argument?

A

Eyes are so complex and work so well that they must have been designed by a creator. This is the same with the planets which are subject to scientific laws and design but is aligned in perfect harmony and allows for life - therefore it must have been created.

59
Q

What did Arthur Brown points to design? + quote

A

The Ozone Layer, allowing for life in all its complexity.

“Could anyone possibly attribute this device to a chance evolutionary process”

60
Q

Quote from Aquinas about the 5th Way

A

“Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed towards their end; and this being we call God.”

61
Q

How did Tennant develop the teleological argument?

A

addition of the anthropic principle
the idea that darwin’s evoltionary model cannot explain human’s ability to love and need art
if it does not aid natural selection then it must be a gift given by God

62
Q

What does Swinburne state?

A

Agrees with the anthropic principle
There is too much complexity and order (the fine tuning argument), it could equally have just been chaos after the big bang
science cannot explain why it continues to work in our favour
he also uses Ockham’s razor, stating that there being a God is the simplest and best explanation instead of looking at science as brute fact or natural selection as chance

63
Q

What is Hume’s analogy of the house and spider?

A

Cleanthes….
If we look at a house, we see it has been built for a purpose and has been designed
But then comparing a house to the universe? Not only are they not similar…we can never know as much about the universe as we do a house.
Also if we compare God to a builder we are limiting their perfection.
It is also true that it makes many build a house…so why not many Gods?

Philo…
Also if we look at animals if they dont adapt they dont survive…therefore ‘design’ is jsut a need to live
He also points out that a universe that is made of complex ‘webs’ doesnt not mean that there is an intelligent deisgner…only a spider

64
Q

How did Hume explore the flaws of the teleological argument?

A
  1. the analogy between man-made and natural things are weak…man-made design is unlike nature, it cannot be compared
  2. some things may look designed…but there are other explanations
  3. there is no proof that the world cannot just be a work of chance
  4. We cannot infer cause from effect…you cannot go from a watch to an entire universe
  5. this world still tells us nothing about the nature of the creator
65
Q

What did Mill conclude about the teleological argument? + quote

A

That even if the argument were correct, the suffering in the natural world would point towards a capricious God, not the traditional Judo-Christian image.
“Nearly all things which men are hanged or imprisoned for doing to one and other are nature’s everyday importance”

66
Q

What is the epicurean hypothesis?

A

That universe began as chaotic but natural forces settled down over time.

67
Q

What did Kant say about order in the world?

A

Is there really order? Or is it really the human need to create categories and use pattern recognition.

68
Q

Quote from Dawkins about the telelogical argument

A

“the living results of natural selection…impress us with the illusions of design”

69
Q

How does evolution challenge this?

A

everything develops in accordance with natural selection, not due to design
this goes against the creationist aspects of design, and mankind’s superiority
there is no need therefore for a God in order to achieve this perfect level of design

70
Q

Arguments against evolution

A
  1. creationism
  2. need for ‘intelligent design’
  3. suicide? (so God wants credit…)
  4. morality
  5. first creatures?
71
Q

What is the Kalam Cosmollogical Argument?

A
  • school of thought in Islam
  • revisited by Lane in 1979
  1. everything has a cause in the universe
  2. the universe has a beginning
    c1. the universe has a cause
    c2. the cause of the universe is God
72
Q

How does the Kalam argument build on the causation argument of cosmology?

A

By saying that everything has a beginning they avoid the issue of an infinite regress

73
Q

What is some scientific evidence that supports the Kalam argument?

A
  • cosmic background radiation/ the big bang
  • hubble’s observations of red shift
  • the second law of thermodynamics
74
Q

What is the issue with the scientific evidence for the kalam argument?

A

Some of them are theories…not actual proven fact.

75
Q

What are Hume’s criticisms of the cosmological argument?

A
  1. Just bc we see cause and effect in the universe does not mean it applies to the universe itself…its a ‘fallacy of composition’ (link back to mother quote)
  2. we have not created a universe and so cannot assume anything about how it is done
  3. could still be a pantheon or a monolith or anything other than the classical god of western theism…this is an inductive leap as it does not follow the premises
76
Q

What does ontological mean?

A

concerned with existence

77
Q

What is Anselm’s definition of God?

A

That than which nothing greater can be conceived

78
Q

What is Anselm’s argument?

A

1) God is a being which nothing greater can be conceived
2) This is a definition which even a fool can understand, even if he does not understand it to exist
3) There is a difference between having an idea in your mind and knowing that it exists in reality
4) For example, a painter has an idea in his mind, but once he has painted it, it exists in both the mind and in reality
5) It is greater to exist both in the mind and in reality, than to only exist in the mind
6) If God existed only in the mind, I can think of something greater, a God who also exists in reality
7) Therefore, in order to be the greatest conceivable being (1), God must exist both in the mind and reality

79
Q

What kind of knowledge and reasoning does the ontological approach use?

A
  • a priori knowledge (can be proven with knowledge)

- deductive reasoning (if the premises are true the conclusions must be true)

80
Q

What is reductio as absurdum?

A

an argument taking to extremes

81
Q

What is Malcolm’s version of the ontological argument

A
  • supports this argument as God is a being who must be necessary
  • must be necessary bc if nothing greater can be conceived then surely God cannot never have existed, as he would be a limited being and we could conceive of a being that could have always existed and is therefore greater.
  • So if God exits he must have always existed, or could have never come into existence
82
Q

What are some criticisms for Malcom’s variation?

A
  • uses synthetic, not analytical statements
  • assumes about the nature of God
  • does not prove God, only makes it possible
83
Q

What is Plantigina’s ontological argument?

A
  • there are multiple worlds created by the choices we make
  • there is a world with a being of maximum greatness
  • a being that exists in all possible worlds has maximum greatness
  • this being does not necessarily have to be God, just the greatest being
84
Q

What are some criticisms of Plantiga’s ontological argument?

A
  • The universe vs God…there would have to be a reality without a universe? otherwise they would be equal…this defeats the purpose and power over the universe that a God must have.
  • It only discusses possible not actual reality, a unicorn might possibly exist, that doesnt mean it does
85
Q

What is Gaunilo’s criticism of the ontological argument?

A
  • there is a leap of logic…
  • I can think of the ‘greatest island’ and if only exists in the mind then it would be greater than one in reality which is not possible with Anselm’s argument…therefore the ‘greatest island’ must exist in reality
86
Q

What is the issue with God being the exception? (cosmological)

A

Could the universe not be the exception? The uncaused causer.

87
Q

How does Quantum physics lead to a lack of causation? (cosmological)

A

Quantum particles do not always have causes for their wave function collapses, theories such as Schrödinger’s for example allow for this.

88
Q

Criticism about the point of cosmological arguments?

A

Is there a point in knowing what caused everything, this does not aid us on a day to day level.

89
Q

What is Hume’s second criticism of the cosmological argument?

A

We can talk about things we have done ourselves with certainty but we have no knowledge of creating the universe and therefore cannot make assumptions about it. There being a cause of the universe can be neither proven nor established.

90
Q

What is Hume’s third criticism of the cosmological argument?

A

Even if we accept God as the first cause we cannot prove that it is the classical God of theism. It could actually be a pantheon or a monolith.
This is an inductive leap as it does not link with the premises. We cannot conclude from speculation.

OCR Philosophy (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions