Chapter 2 - The Philosphy Of Religion Flashcards
A Posteriori Argument
Cosmological and teleological argument
Based on premises that can be known only by means of experience of the world (there is a world, events have causes, etc).
Ex: the cosmological and the teleological argument.
A priori argument
Does not depend on such premises. It rests on premises that can be known to be true independently of experience of the world: one need only clearly conceive of the proposition to see that it is true.
Ex: ontological argument
The Cosmological Argument
Begins with posteriori assumptions that the universe exists and that something outside it is required to explain its existence.
- It is contingent
- Something else is logically “before” the universe
- It constitutes the reason for the existence of the universe.
- Such a being is God.
First Cause Argument - St. Thomas Aquinas
- Everything in the universe has a cause.
- For everything that exists, there is some “other thing”.
- An infinite regress is impossible. Must have a beginning - not cyclical.
- Must be a first cause outside of universe capable of producing everything beside itself.
- Such a being must be an infinite, necessary being, that is, God.
The Teleological Argument
Plato, St. Paul, Cicero.
WILLIAM PALEY’s NATURAL THEOLOGY
Argues for the existence of God and begins with the premise that the world exhibits intelligent purpose or order and proceeds to the conclusion that there must be or probably is a divine intelligence, a supreme designer to account for the observed or perceived intelligent purpose or order.
William Paley - Natural Theology
Argues we must infer an intelligent designer to account for the purpose-revealing world (watch).
- Humans are products of intelligent design (purpose)
- The universe resembles these human artifacts.
- Therefore, the universe is a product of intelligent design.
- Universe is way more complicated than a human.
- Therefore: it has an intelligent designer.
David Hume
Cleanthes: natural theologian (Paley of his time)
Demea: orthodox believer
Philo: Skeptic. Puts forth the argument that goes against the argument from design.
Hume attacks PALEY’s argument
- Argues universe is not like the productions of human design
- We can’t compare this universe to another one - arg. from analogy to artifact fails (Paley: one instance of purpose in nature, sufficient)
- We infer a grande anthropomorphic designer
- Arg. fails because we see universe as a grande machine - might just have existed by chance.
- Weak: world = order AND disorder
The Ontological Argument
Anselm and Gaunilo
- Most intriguing for theism.
- Priori proof for God
- Is existence a property and necessity of the existence of “being”intelligent.
- Argues God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent.
- Anselm: God’s existence is certain, only a fool would deny it. Yet, seeks to understand it.
- Accuses Anselm of pulling rabbits out of hats, island example (however, universe cannot be compared to an island as there is no other universe to be compared to)
- Plantinga: no greatest natural number…there is always a number that is greater.
Thomas Aquinas - The Five Ways
A Posteriori Arguments.
- Argument from Change. Unmoved Mover who moves all things.
- Argument from Causation. Must be a first cause to explain existence of causes.
- Argument from Contingency. Dependent beings must have an independent being/rely on for subsistence.
- Argument from Degrees of Excellence. There are degrees of excellence/must be a perfect being from whence comes all excellence.
- Argument from Harmony. There is harmony of nature that calls for explanation. The only efficient explanation is that there is a divine designer who planned such harmony.
William Lane Craig - The Kalam Cosmological Argument and the Anthropic Principle
Two versions of Kalam argument: both aiming to prove that the universe must have a cause of its existence. Argues evidence of Big Bang confirms universe began to exist - must have had a cause. The Anthropic Principle states “if the universe was much different from the way it is, we wouldn’t be here to wonder why it exists.” Also argues there is good reason to believe, on basis of Anthropic Principle, that the first cause is the personal creator of theism.
Paul Edwards - A Critique of the Cosmological Argument
Attacks Cosmological Argument, specifically Aquinas’ second and third arguments (causal argument and the argument from contingency). Argument doesn’t establish existence of God. Doesn’t show as all-powerful, all-good, or is personal.
William Rowe
Analyses Anselms’s version of ontological argument and considers gaunilo and kant’s criticism of it. Ends with assessment of value of argument.
Anselm fails to prove the existence of God, yet, it will remain as high achievement of the human intellect.
The Argument From Evil
Atheologian: argues against the existence of God.
Neutralises any positive evidence for God’s existence based on whatever survives their criticisms or demonstrating it is unreasonable to believe in God.
Problem of evil arises because: God is omnipotent, omnibenevolent….
If evil exists, how can God allow it and how can He be all-good?
Moral and Natural Evil
Moral: evil humans choose and are capable of doing. Humans are morally responsible.
Natural: hurricanes, earthquakes, burning bridges, etc. Nature does of own accord. Devil is brought in as natural cause of evil.
Main defence the argument from evil: FREE WILL.
St. Augustine.
Argument: it is logically impossible for God to create free creatures and guarantee that they will never do evil.
All moral evil derived from creature freedom of the will.
Plantinga: caused by devil and his minions.
Hick and Swinburne: Natural evil part of nature and parcel of things, physical laws + responsibility to humans to exercise their free will.
