Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

apologetics > Faith & Reason > Flashcards

Faith & Reason Flashcards

1
Q

What is reasoning?

A

The means by which we participate in the objective rational order of reality

It includes:

  1. calculating
  2. apprehension or understanding
  3. insight
  4. contemplation
  5. intellectual intuition
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Aristotelian Logic

A

Linguistic terms express mental concepts which represent real essences/natures of things

Metaphysical Realism: Assumes the existence of essences and our ability to know them, as opposed to metaphysical nominalism: essences are mere nominal or names or human labels

Three laws

  1. Law of identity: (A = A)
    Whatever is, is
  2. Law of non-contradiction: (A != !A)
    Nothing can both be and not be
  3. Law of the excluded middle: (A or not A, but not A and not A at the same time)
    Everything must either be or not be
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

The argument against metaphysical nominalism

A

Metaphysical Realism: Assumes the existence of essences and our ability to know them, as opposed to metaphysical nominalism: essences are mere nominal or names or human labels

Metaphysical nominalism is what enables computers to process and perform calculations. As humans, we also can compute or perform calculations using our reason, but we are more than computers, we also understand and gain insight, therefore we believe that terms are more than mere labels but express real essences or natures.

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

What is an apparent contradiction?

A

Not an actual contradiction, but rather a difficulty in understanding that teases the mind into further inquiry and investigation

An apparent contradiction, therefore, is not grounds for doubt (willfully withholding ascent from God’s revealed truth)

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

What does it mean to question the faith in faith?

A

face difficulties (apparent contradictions) with full confidence in divine revelation, and that doing so will yield an answer or revelation in due time.

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

What is faith?

A

Believing something on the basis of the testimony of another

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

7 harmonic principles between faith and reason

A
  1. Harmonic principles
  2. Supportive Principle
  3. Defensive principle
  4. Service principle
  5. Corrective principle
  6. Sapiential principle
  7. Fulfillment principle
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Harmonic principle 1: The Harmony principle

A

Right faith and right reason is logically consistent with each other

Right Faith is faith that is distinct from a mistake or misinterpretation of what God has revealed.

Right Reason is the reason that is destinct from mistakes or misunderstanding of the reality of things.

Whatever God has revealed is true, and whatever right reason has revealed is also true. Any seeming contradiction between right faith and right reason is only an apparent contradiction, which can be resolved through patient inquiry.

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

Harmonic principle 2: Supportive Principle

A

Right reason can be used to support or demonstrate many of the truths about God and His characteristics, and some of the truths we believe by faith

Eg.

  1. Kalam cosmological argument
  2. Historical research confirms the existence of Jesus, the crucifixion, and an empty tomb
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Harmonic principle 3: The Defensive Principle

A

Right reason can refute objections brought against the faith

Eg. )
Saying that the trinity is impossible because 1 + 1 + 1 = 3.

Using mathematics to disprove the trinity is a category mistake. The persons of the Trinity are divine persons and not subject to the limitations of a person

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

Harmonic principle 4: The Service Principle

A

Right reason can discover many truths that serve to understand what God has revealed.

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

Harmonic principle 5: The correction principle

A

Right faith serves to correct errors that reason commonly makes

eg) faith corrects the assumption of the reason that this existence is purely material, as we know through revelation that this life is spiritual

Reason will eventually catch up to faith as it labours along slowly

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

Harmonic principle 6: The Sapiential principle

A

Right faith allows a person to see all things in relation to God, and to interpret reality correctly

Eg.) If a person believes that God has created the world he can read, interpret, and understand the world in relation to God. The world has a structure and order to it because God is a God of order.

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

Harmonic principle 7: The fulfillment principle

A

Right faith provides answers to some of the most profound questions that reason raises, but cannot answer.

eg)
What happens after death?
Why do we exist?
what is the meaning of life?

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

3 fundamental mistakes in the relationship between faith and reason and Thomas Acquinas’ refutation

A
  1. Skepticism: Faith in itself is irrational and contrary to reason, because faith in itself cannot be proved, and science has disproved religion
  2. Fideism: Faith is opposed to reason therefore we cannot trust reason, and so all we really need is the bible
  3. Subjectivism: Faith is subjective and therefore it is only true for me

Thomas Aquinas argues that faith and reason are never truly in conflict because there is a fundamental unity of truth that is based on the order of reality. Truth is singular, and therefore there cannot be something that is true according to faith and false according to reason.

Truth is also not something subjective, it is based on something outside of the mind and therefore objective

Because God is the ultimate source of reality, He is both the light of reason and the author of divine revelation and the light of faith. Seeing that both reason and faith comes from God, and the truth is singular, faith and reason will therefore never truly contradict each other, because truth cannot contradict truth. The Christian faith is therefore imminently reasonable.

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

What are signs of credibility

A

The rational warrant for accepting the claims of the Christian faith.

eg.) the miracles of christ

Even though the things and mysteries of faith, cannot be fully understood by us or proving through reason, it is reasonable for us to believe it, because God has revealed it to us, and given us signs of credibility.

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

what do creeds like “fides quaerens intellectum” and “credo ut intelligam” mean for faith and reason?

A

fides quaerens intellectum: faith seeking understanding

credo ut intelligam: I believe so that I may understand

It describes the primacy of the role of faith over reason., in that faith comes first and understanding follows.

Reason is aided by faith’s tutelage

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

If truth is objective, then why are people so irrational?

A

We live in a fallen world where people’s exercise of reason is expressed in various forms of irrationality.

An argument that is in itself perfectly rational and valid will often fall on ears deafened by predjudice, passion, ignorance, misunderstanding, incomprehension or ideology

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

How is a good argument like a diamond?

A

A good argument is effective partly because it is like a diamond that reflects the light of day, of objective reality. Like a diamond, it cannot originate light, only reflect it from its a source in reality

Like a diamond, it is not easily cut, not easily refuted; it cuts through other, softer material, refuting and conquering error.

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

5 ways reason is a friend of the nonrational, but not the irrational

A
  1. Reason is the friend of divine authority, which can neither deceive nor be deceived, but not necessarily of human authority, fads, and fashions
  2. Reason is the friend of faith in this divine authority, but not of naivete, thus reason leads towards faith, and away from cults
  3. Reason is the friend of hope, but not of human wishful thinking
  4. Reason is the friend of agape (love) but not of eros (selfish passion)
  5. Reason is the friend and complement to imagery, symbol, and myth, which also reveal the truth, but not to impossible imaginings, esoteric fantasies, and pseudomysticisms.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

3 acts of the mind that relate to arguments and reality

A

understanding expressed in terms, which expresses essences. Terms are either clear or unclear (cogent). Terms are clear if they are intelligible and unambiguous.

judging expressed in propositions, which expresses facts. Propositions are either true or untrue (sound). A proposition is true if it corresponds to reality if it says what is.

reasoning expressed in arguments, which expresses causes. Arguments are either valid or invalid. An argument is true if the conclusion necessarily follows from the premise, and if the argument is free from logical fallacy, then the conclusion must be true.

We create arguments in terms, propositions, and arguments because we think in concepts, judgments, and reasoning. we do this because the reality we think about includes essences, facts and causes.

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

How are arguments like eyes?

A

They see reality

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

When is an argument a bad argument?

A

When the terms are unclear

When propositions are false

When the argument is fallacious

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

3 important questions about arguments?

A
  1. Is the argument probable or demonstratively certain?
  2. Is the certainty of a demonstrative argument merely psychological or is it another kind of certainty?
  3. Is empirical demonstration the only kind possible or is there another kind?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

3 kinds of evidence

A
  1. empirical
  2. experimental
  3. philosophical proofs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Structure of a summa style argument

A
  1. Definition of terms and the meaning of the question
  2. The importance of the question, the difference it makes
  3. Objections to the Christian answer to the question
  4. Answers to each of these objections
  5. Arguments for the Christian answer from premises accepted by the unbeliever as well as by the believer
  6. Objections to these arguments
  7. Answers to each of these objections.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Why is appologetics so important?

A

It is obedience to God:

1 Peter tells us to “give reasons for the hope that is inside of us”

2 Cor 10:3-5

4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 6 And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your obedience is complete.

It strengthens our faith:
We cant believe what we know to be untrue, we cannot love what we believe to be unreal.

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

Difference between the act of faith and the object of faith

A

The object of faith is not the act of believing but the things revealed by God. These revelations are expressed as propositions. But these propositions are only proximal objects in that they are not the end in themselves, just the finger that points to the moon (God). The ultimate object of faith is God.

The act of believing is expressed by liturgical and moral acts. The act of faith is not mere belief, as people are not willing to die for beliefs like “Tomato is a fruit”, but they are willing to die for their faith.

29
Q

Does quantum superposition defeat the law of non-contradiction in logic?

A

NO

Some people misinterpret quantum mechanics or the quantum superposition to mean that something can be both true and false at the same time, or that reality is in some way non-binary, that A can be both A and not A at the same time.

This is false for a number of reasons.

Quantum physics studies the sub-atomic world and as such refuses to give definite answers to every question that might be asked, but often only tells us the probability of observing various results in experiments.

In order to describe this uncertainty that exists before observed phenomena, Quantum Physics uses the idea of a superposition

a superposition is a state of uncertainty within which both, or all probabilities exists simultaneously in potential only.

This does not mean that an atom can be both decayed and not decayed at the same time, but only that the possibility to be either decayed or not decayed exists in potential, before the outcome is observed. In other words, the outcome is in a state of uncertainty or superposition in which both potentialities exist, as we are unsure of the outcome before it can be observed

3 categories of thought about quantum superpositions

  1. Definitive
    The cat is either definitively either alive or dead at all times, as every atom has a definite state at all times, even if described as being in a superposition, because there is some information that we don’t have access to, preventing us from knowing the actual state, leaving us to deal only in probabilities.
  2. Multiverse:
    Each part of the superposition exists but in different cats, one dead and one alive, each cat represent a branch into another universe, when we open the box, the superposition collapses and we are stuck in either one of those branches
  3. Copenhagen
    The cat is neither alive or dead, but also not both at the same time. There is no answer to the question of what happens before we open the box. The only meaningful thing that this position allows us to say about reality is rooted in our actual observations of the outcome. Asking what happens when we are not observing is meaningless

The superposition state is at minimum a way of expressing the probability of observing various outcomes, not a contradiction of the laws of logic.

30
Q

4 aspects of faith

A
  1. intellectual faith
    Is Belief. Stronger than emotional faith, as my mind can believe even when my feelings are shaken. It is believing everything that God has revealed on the grounds of the authority of the One who revealed it. This aspect of faith is formulated in propositions and summarized in creeds
  2. emotional faith
    Feelings assurance, trust, or confidence in a person. It includes hope and peace
  3. volitional faith
    An act of the will. It’s a commitment to obey God’s will. This faith is faithfullness, or fedility. It manifests itself in behaviour or good works.
  4. heart faith
    Not feelings or sentiment, but the absolute center of the soul where God the spirit works in us. It is the very self, or I
31
Q

Faith works controversy

A

Faith alone is sometimes taken to mean intellectual belief, but this is not sufficient

Jas 2:19
Even the demons believe and shudder

A saving faith includes hope (emotional faith) and love (volitional faith). In other words a saving faith is not mere faith, but faithfulness. This kind of faith is sufficient for salvation as it produces good works

32
Q

difference between the act of reason and the object of reason

A

Object: Includes all that reason can know. This means 3 things that correspond with the 3 acts of reason (understand, discover, prove):

  1. All truths can be understood by reason
  2. All truth can be discovered by human reason to be true
  3. All truths can be proved logically

The act of reason includes all personal and subjective acts of the mind through which we understand (apprehension), discover (judgement), and prove (reasoning) the truth.

33
Q

5 possibilities of the relationship between any two classes or sets of things

A
  1. All A’s are B’s but not all B’s are A’s (A is a subclass of B)
  2. All B’s are A’s but not all A’s are B’s (B is a subclass of A)
  3. All A’s are B’s and all B’s are A’s (A and B are interchangeable)
  4. No A’s are B’s and no B’s are A’s (A and B are mutually exclusive)
  5. Some but not all A’s are B’s and some but not all B’s are A’s (A and B partially overlap)
34
Q

Given the 5 possibilities of the relationship between any two classes or sets of things, what are the 5 positions on the logical relationship between faith and reason

A
  1. Rationalism (faith is a subclass of reason)
  2. Fideism (Reason is a subclass of faith)
  3. Identity of faith and reason (faith and reason are interchangeable)
  4. Dualism (faith and reason are mutually exclusive)
  5. Partial overlapping (Faith and reason partially overlaps)
35
Q

5 positions on the logical relationship between faith and reason: Rationalism

A

Rationalism:

Everything we know by faith can also be understood, or discovered, or proved by reason, but not vice versa. Faith is a subclass or subdepartment of reason.

This is the position of Deism or naturalism

Anselm “necessary reason” tried to prove even the doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation by strict rational philosophical arguments

Hegel was very different from Anselm in that he radically reinterpreted the content of revelation to fit his philosophy. (denying creation out of nothing and Christ’s unique divinity). He stretched the word Christian beyond any useful historical definition. He believed that the historic Christian faith, traditionally interpreted, was a primitive, only symbolically or mythically true precursor of his philosophy.

Hegel’s rationalism is quite popular today, however, Anselm’s is totally extinct.

36
Q

Scientism and its problems

A

Science alone explains all things and science alone is the guide to life.

Would believe that there is no truth beyond science, and therefore God, Meaning, and Morality is completely subjective and a private matter

reason is not limited to science and truth is not limited to that which can be verified by science, we can also know or discover the truth of things using philosophical reasoning. Philosophy can discover truths that is beyond the range of what science can tell us, but which is still within the range of reason.

37
Q

Can science explain everything?

A

No

Scientific methods were designed to answer answering specific questions and deals with specific subject matter

3 Questions science cannot answer: God, Meaning, Morality

God: Modern science cannot settle the question about God’s existence or God’s attributes, because science investigates things in the world of nature, and God exists outside of nature

Meaning: Science can also not answer questions about the meaning and purpose of life,

Morality: Science can also not answer moral questions. Science can tell us how to build a nuclear bomb, but cannot tell us whether it is right to use one.

38
Q

What is something that demonstrates the limits of reason?

A

The nature of God

Even though we can understand that God exists and even understand some attributes of God through reason alone, there are aspects of God that remain beyond the range of reason.

Scripture says He dwells in unapproachable light.

something more than reason is needed to enter into the fullness of life.

Through faith, God reveals to us His life in the unapproachable light so we may become partakers in the fullness of life

39
Q

Limits of the scientific method

A
  1. ) Relies on measurement:
    if something cannot be measured it cannot be studied with the scientific method

We cannot measure things like how much your spouse loves you, this kind of information can only be discovered through testimony and trust in that testimony

We also cannot use it to prove or disprove God’s existence, or to discover the morality of an action, as these things cannot be measured

Relies on Repeatability:

Even if something can be measured it still needs to fulfill the second criteria of repeatability. A miracle might be measurable, but would fail the criteria of repeatabillity

40
Q

The scientific method

A
  1. Question
  2. Hypothesis
  3. Prediction
  4. Observation
  5. Theory
41
Q

Does a scientific theory have the same degree of certitude as a mathematical equation or a valid philosophical syllogism?

A

NO

The outcome of a scientific test or experiment requires interpretation by a scientist

This interpretation will depend on what other theories the scientist has accepted as true, and other presuppositions.

42
Q

What are 3 basic assumptions that underly the scientific method, which themselves cannot be scientifically proven?

A
  1. Assumes the cosmos is orderly and intelligible
  2. Assumes we have access to objective truths through observations and experimentations
  3. Assumes that our reason is ordered towards identifying truths, that we can recognize when our ideas correspond to objective reality.
43
Q

4 Common objects to the faith raised by the scientific method

A
  1. The scientific method has disproven the existence of God.

The scientific method cannot prove or disprove the existence of God, as the scientific method can only study those things that exist in nature. God does not exist in nature but outside of it and is the source of it

  1. Foundational Christian teachings have been disproven by the scientific process.

There is no conflict between right faith and right reason (science). All contradictions are only apparent contradictions that can be resolved with patient inquiry

  1. scientific way of thinking is opposed to faith and therefore cannot be integrated

This statement cannot be empirically demonstrated. There have been many scientists who were also devoutly religious. (Newton, Kepler, Copernicus, Descarte) So clearly, it is possible.

Both religion and science have elements of faith, trust, and reason

  1. Christianity is an obstacle to scientific progress

The university itself was a medieval catholic institution

Many early and modern scientist cite their faith as inspiration for their scientific pursuits

Christian clergy who have made influential scientific discoveries

44
Q

3 Laws of thermodynamics

A
  1. The law of Conservation of Energy

Energy cannot be created or destroyed only transformed from one form to another

The total energy of a closed system is equal to the heat energy added to the system, minus the work done by the system

  1. The law of Entropy

if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the end state will always be less than that of the initial state.

Energy moves from a state of lower entropy to a state of higher entropy

  1. The law of absolute zero

The entropy of an absolutely perfect crystalline structure is zero at absolute zero

Absolute zero -273.14 degrees Celcius

absolute zero is nearly impossible to obtain as energy moves from a state of high entropy to low entropy and therefore the surrounding energy will want to move into the object of absolute zero, therefore raising it’s temperature

45
Q

5 positions on the logical relationship between faith and reason: Fideism

A

Contends that the only certain knowledge we can have is by faith

While rationalism denies the existence of any truths of faith unprovable by reason, fideism denies the existence of any certain truths attainable by reason without faith

Practical fideism is the refusal to prove any of the doctrines of the faith by reason, but to say that all truth outside of religion is uncertain and therefore untrustworthy is ridiculous as we can be certain that the Pythagorean theorem is true.

however, according to Pascal, certainty can come from a form of non-religious faith, namely faith in reason itself.

Pascal argued that to trust reason in the first place must itself be an act of faith, and not rationally provable. For if trust in reason was proved by reason, it would commit the logical fallacy of “begging the question”, the only way out of this circular reasoning is a non-rational leap of faith, therefore ultimate theoretical justification for reason cannot be reason itself

46
Q

5 positions on the logical relationship between faith and reason: Identity of faith and Reason

A

All that is knowable by faith, is also knowable to reason. Even though this is a logical possibility, it has no evidence to support it.

47
Q

5 positions on the logical relationship between faith and reason: Dualism

A

faith and reason are mutually exclusive

Popular today as it reflects the separation of church and state, of religion and philosophy, the sacred and secular

It reduces reason to scientific, mathematical, and empirical reasoning, and reduces faith to a personal, subjective attitude.

It would be reasonable to hold to dualism if by religion you mean some esoteric eastern religion based on private mystical experience, but this would be unreasonable for a Christian, a Jew, or Muslim who believes in a religion of public propositional revelation.

Faith conceived as a mere subjective experience is a fundamental misunderstanding of faith judged by historic Christian standards

48
Q

5 positions on the logical relationship between faith and reason: Partial overlapping

A

This position is the most reasonable and correct one

Distinguishes between 3 different kinds of truth

  1. truths of faith and not reason: Things revealed by God but not understandable, provable, or discoverable by reason (the trinity)
  2. truths of both faith and reason: Things revealed by God, but also understandable, discoverable, or provable by reason (The existence of God)
  3. truths of reason and not of faith: Things not revealed by God, but known by human reason (natural sciences)

the task of the apologist, therefore, is to prove the propositions of class 1, and to answer all objections to propositions in class 2

The propositions of truths of faith alone cannot be proven, , but we can answer objections to them for example:

1 If a unitarian object to the doctrine of the trinity because he believes it splits God into triplets, we can answer the objection and show that this is a misunderstanding, as it does not mean three Gods, but three Persons in one God.

  1. A logician objects to the trinity and says ti it is a contradiction to call anything both one and three. We can reply that God is one nature, not three, and three persons, not one. This is not any more contradictory to say that we are two of two natures, both mental and physical, mind and matter, and yet only one person.
49
Q

Why is apologetics limited?

A

Because not all truths about God can be proven by reason and logic.

But limited does not mean useless. Our reason, along with human nature is corrupted, but like a crippled body, it can still be valid and useful.

Through reason we can persuade others to walk on the beach, they otherwise would never have walked on, but it is through faith alone that they must make the leap into the ocean of the living God.

50
Q

Can faith and reason ever contradict each other?

A

No

Thomas Aquinas provides two reasons why this is not possible

  1. Only falsehoods can contradict truth. Truth cannot contradict truth
  2. God is the teacher of both Faith and Reason
51
Q

Aquinas: Only falsehood can contradict the truth

A

Any truth that human reason is capable of knowing, cannot be opposed to the truth of the Christian faith.

If Christianity is true, and the reason is true, then there can be no contradiction between them, since truth cannot contradict truth

By Faith, Aquinas means, the objective stock of propositions revealed to us by God

By Reason, Aquinas does not mean subjective reason, but objective reason properly used

If a contradiction exists, either we have misunderstood the faith, or misused our reason

52
Q

Aquinas: God is the teacher of both Reason and Faith

A

God is the author of our nature, and therefore our ability to reason

God is also the author of Faith

53
Q

Why according to Aquinas, are we able to answer arguments brought against the faith?

A

Every argument brought against the faith contains within itself a fallacy, and therefore can be shown to be false by reason alone.

54
Q

Justin Martyr’s threefold process of discovery

A
  1. A man seeks the truth by the unaided effort of reason and is disappointed
  2. It is offered to him by faith, and he accepts.
  3. And, having accepted, he finds that it satisfies his reason.
55
Q

What are the three follies that will always be present in arguments raised against the faith and how do they relate to the 3 acts of the mind

A
  1. misunderstanding, as opposed to understanding, to fail to grasp
  2. ignorance, as opposed to sound judgement, to fail to know or discover the facts
  3. Fallacy, as opposed to sound reasoning, to be illogical and fail to prove

It is because of these 3 follies that arguments against the faith can be refuted by reason

56
Q

5 Objections to Faith and Reason:

If God’s ways are infinitely above ours, how can we expect to understand them?

A

Through revelation. We can understand what he has revealed to us. Otherwise, he would be a poor teacher.

Like a good teacher, He communicates effectively, translating advanced truths he knows into the proper level of understanding for his students.

However, this does not mean that one can completely understand divine truth. We know God by revelation, but we do not comprehend Him. We touch him but do not define him with our reason.

57
Q

5 Objections to Faith and Reason:

If we are to be humble, then shouldn’t we demean reason?

A

Reason or logic is created by God. It is part of God’s image in us, and if God has created it then who are we to demean it?

We don’t praise an artist by demeaning his work.

The proper place for humility is regarding our use of God’s gifts, not regarding those fits themselves.

58
Q

5 Objections to Faith and Reason:

Isn’t it proud to think human reason can know a lot about God?

A

It is more proud to claim to know the limits of reason when we don’t or to use reason to limit reason than to just use reason. It would also be self-contradictory.

For to draw a limit to thought you must think both sides of that limit

59
Q

5 Objections to Faith and Reason:

If Christianity is reasonable, then what about those intellectually brilliant unbelievers who rejected Christianity, such as Nietzche, Jefferson, Machiavelli, Russel, and Skinner?

A

Reply 1:

Christianity is reasonable but not obvious. It is more like E =mc2 than 2+2=4

Reply 2

If Christianity is so irrational then why did so many brilliant minds accept it?

Descartes, Pascal, Galileo, Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Kierkegaard, Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Tolkein, da Vinci, Michelangelo, etc

Reply 3

Brilliant minds often reject Christianity because they don’t want it to be true (moral objection), because it is no longer fashionable or because it commands obedience, repentance, and humility.

60
Q

5 Objections to Faith and Reason:

Aren’t Christians’ reasons really just rationalizations? Thomas Aquinas didn’t really arrive at the existence of God by means of the reasoning of the five proof, instead, he learned of God’s existence through his mother, then as an adult, he looked for some reasons to confirm the faith he had already adopted for nonlogical reasons. That not reasoning but rationalizing.

A

Reply 1:

Even if that is all Aquinas did, that would not invalidate his proofs.

An irrational subjective motive does not necessarily mean an irrational argument

Even if Einstein was a nazi who only wanted to discover e=mc2 so that he could build the atomic bomb in order to win the world war for Hitler, His bad motive still would not invalidate the validity of the formula e=mc2

Genetic fallacy: confusing the psychological origin of an idea with its logical validity.

Reply B:

Looking for good reasons for your faith can be perfectly honest if you are also open to reasons against it, as Aquinas certainly was. The objections against the many doctrines he defense in the Summa are manifold, fairly stated, and objectively answered

Reply C:

Although Aquinas first learned about God by faith, Aristotle didn’t. He knew nothing of the Scriptures but much about God. History proves that human reason unaided by faith in divine revelation can come to know the existence and some of the attributes of God. Aristotle’s reasoning was not rationalizing, for he had no faith to rationalize

61
Q

6 Objections to Faith and Reason:

Doesn’t reason take away the merit of faith? There is nothing praiseworthy in believing something because you see it, whether with your eyes or with your mind, but it is praiseworthy to trust a friend. To prove what you believe removes your merit, or praiseworthiness, in believing it, so it is not advantageous.

A

Reply 1:

Since we are supposed to grow up and figure things out for ourselves, understanding and proving our faith is praiseworthy. Our parents don’t want us to remain children who don’t understand them but can only trust them, nor do they want us to stop trusting them. What is praiseworthy is obeying God’s will in all things, including his will for us to grow up.

Reply 2:

To add reason to faith, is progress, but to demand reason before faith is not. If I demand proof before trusting you, that means I trust you less. But to desire to rationally understand the one I trust is not a weakening of the trust

Reply 3:

Reason and faith are not rivals but allies against irrational doubts, passion, prejudice, propaganda, fear, folly, fantasy and fallacy. We still need faith even after we know a truth by reasons, to stave off irrational doubts.

62
Q

physical reductionism

A

The view that everything can be explained by physics, and that all other sciences, such as biology, and chemistry, are reducible to physics

63
Q

Does physical reductionism explain everything?

A

No

  1. Irriducabillity of Sciences

history has shown that no one science can be completely reduced to another, in other words, you cannot reduce the science of biology to physics alone, let alone reduce “All” sciences to physics.

  1. Emergent properties

Physical reductionism fails to explain Emergent properties. things that cannot be explained in terms of the parts alone

  1. Intuitions

Physical reductionism cannot explain our Intuitions Intuitions are not mere emotional experiences, but are born out of reflection on existence as a whole and are truth indicating. Our intuition tells us that:

a. ) we have free will
b) life has a purpose
c) objective reality or truth exists and that we can know it
d) that life is fundamentally moral
e) that our lives have purpose and meaning

64
Q

Why is physical reductionism a force for the psychological destruction of human beings?

A

Because it denies the truth, and posits life as essentially random meaninglessness

According to Victor Frankl, many psychological disorders come from living in an existential void, where the sense of life’s meaning and purpose has been evacuated. A void that has been created by the indoctrination of physical reductionism

65
Q

Aquinas Primary Substance

A

Anything that is irreducible to another.

66
Q

Aquinas’ Substantial forms

A

A substantial form gives primary substances an irreducible unity. The parts of a primary substance then are participants in this whole.

An objects substantial form is what makes that object intelligible. Meaning we only understand or recognize it, because we recognize it’s substantial form. In other words, as substantial form is what makes a thing to be what it is.

A substantial form is an organized whole that can consist out of various parts, but the substantial form itself cannot be reduce to any of it’s parts.

Not only does the substantial form organize its parts, but it also the inner source of all the activities of it’s parts

67
Q

Does a car have substantial form?

A

No

A car has a “coordinated” form. When the form of a car ceases to exist, its parts still continue to be what they are. If you remove a wheel from a car, it still continues to exist as a wheel.

This is not the case with the human body, which is a substantial form

According to Aristotle, a severed finger ceases to be a finger, as a finger is part of a living body, but when severed it is no longer part of a body, nor living,

68
Q

Substantial Forms and knowledge

A

Without substantial forms, no knowledge can exist

Aristotle realized that the forms or the things in nature that we observe and the resulting form in our minds are one and the same form

Aristotle defined knowledge as oneness of mind and things according to their forms

69
Q

Why is it important to be aware of the fact that Science requires interpretation

A

A lot of the time people wrongly identify a particular philosophical position with science itself, due to the lack of awareness that science requires interpretation.

For example:

Many people claim that science endorses atomism as the only explanation for reality, when in fact it doesn’t, rather atomism is a particular philosophical position or interpretation. There are also other equally valid, and some would say better interpretations or philosophical positions, namely Hylomorphism.

Therefore to say that atomism is science instead of saying that it is a particular interpretation, one of many, is false.

apologetics (11 decks)

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