Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

ZZZ: Philosophy > Final Exam Prep > Flashcards

Final Exam Prep Flashcards

1
Q

Modal Ontological Argument

A

1) modal logic
2) there is a possibility god exists
3) god exists if and only if he exists necessarily
4) hence it is possible that it is necessary that god exists
5) using modal logic, god must exist necessarily

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

Plantinga Modal Ontological Argument

A

1) there is a possibility of an unsurpassable greatness
2) it is necessarily true that an unsurpassable greatness is one which has maximal excellence in every possible world
3) it is necessarily true that a being that has maximal excellence possesses omnipotence, omnibenevolence and omniscience
4) it is necessary that an unsurpassable greatness exists in every world

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

Design Argument

A

1) there exists complex structures in the world
2) nothing comes from nothing, hence these structures have a cause
3) it is highly improbable that structures of these complexity arose from chance collisions
4) for every x, if x has a purpose, x must have a purposer
5) for every y, if y is a purposer, y must be a mind
6) hence, these complex structures must have a purpose
7) hence, these complex structures must have been created by a mind

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

Swinburn Finetuning Argument

A

The world is specifically ‘fine tuned’ for life on earth. Any minor change and we would not be able to exist.

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

Counters to design argument t

A

1) spinnoza (eyes dont mean shit)

2) hume (not perfect, not good, not single, baby god)

3) epicurean (atoms did they thing fr)

4) dennett (evolution is either created naturally or by mind, if by mind it wouldn’t be suboptimal, it is suboptimal, must be natural)

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

Spinazona counter (Design argument)

A

Eye simply happens to be able to see, there is no purpose.

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

Hume Counter (Design argument)

A

1) this does not prove god is perfect
2) this does not prove god is good
3) this does not prove that god is only one
4) this does not prove that god does not have a creator (baby god)

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

Epicurean theory (design argument)

A
  • posit space
  • posit atoms
  • posit natural motion on part of atoms
  • posit atoms have eternal properties (attract/repel)
    posit= recognize the possibility of:

With this, we have everything we need to create intricate purposeful structures

created by atoms floating around, (creation by chance), some collisions have greater survival ability than others

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

Bertrand Russell belief (design argument)

A

1) evolution disproves the need for god.
2) how could a god that is perfect create such an imperfect world (ku kulx klan)

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

Darwin belief (design argument)

A

flip flopping

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

Dennett Counter

A

1) if evolution was not created naturally, it would have to be created by a mind
2) if evolution was created by a mind, it would not be suboptimal
3) but it is suboptimal (backwards retina)
4) the universe must be created naturally

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

anslems ontological argument

A

1) its greater to exist in reality than only in the mind

2) if the being greater than which cannot be conceived existed only in the mind, it would not be the being greater than which cannot be conceived

3) hence the being greater than which cannot be conceived doesn’t exist only in the mind

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

Gauinolo objection to Anselm + reply

A

parody objection

Same argument with island - must exist in reality, but it does not

counter: the idea of an island which is greater than which cannot be conceived is unintelligible, how do we decide which qualities are great? this is subjective?

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

Descartes ontological argument

A

the concept of god is the concept of a necessary existence, if one thinks of god has not existing than one is not thinking of god

there is no way of thinking of god as not existing

‘can you think of a triangle without three sides’

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

kant counter to Descartes + reply

A

existence is not a property. existence is a precondition for other properties

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

epicurean argument for the problem of evil

A

0) God = powerful, good being
1) if god is powerful, he can remove evil
2) if god is good, he wills to remove evil
3) Evil exists (suffering exists)
4) god can and wills to remove evil
5) hence, evil does not exist
6) Contradiction

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

assumptions in the problem of evil?

A

extra assumption 1 (4): god does whatever god wills / god achieves everything he wishes

Extra assumption 2 (also in 4): god does right now whatever god wills right now

extra assumption 3: it makes sense to ascribe these things to god

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

Responses to POE

A

1) Pre Christian Greek Traditional Response to POE (it is beneath god to care about human affairs)

2) Traditional Christian response to POE (gods plan)

3) Ash’arism response to POE (it is wrong to attribute human qualities to god)

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

Pre Christian Greek Traditional Response to POE (Aristotle/Cicero)

A

it is wrong to think gods goodness means that god wishes to remove all evil among human beings

it is beneath god to care about human affairs

God manages the universe, humanity are just ants in the grand scheme of things

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

Traditional Christian response to POE (St. Augustin)

A

God brings the good out of evil. Colonialism example, we exist due to colonialism, and while colonialism is bad, we are good

christian theists believe in after life, where evil is essentially dealt with. hence, god is not ignoring evil

this happens because god is almighty

evil can be allowed because good can come out of it, and the evil can be addressed in the afterlife

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

Ash’arism response to POE

A

It is arrogant as well as philosophically difficult to claim that one’s mind can identify moral facts, and that God is also bound by these moral facts

Good and evil are relational, and moral facts are not objective

human minds cannot adequately evaluate gods actions (if god does not do x, god is not good)

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

Martin Luther response

A

evil can be addressed in the afterlife. There is life beyond this life, in which all will be punished and repaid

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

Mackie argument of evil / logical argument from evil

A

(1) God is omnipotent
(2) God is perfectly good
(3) Evil Exists
(4) there are no limits to what an omnipotent being can do (implication from 1)
(5) a good thing eliminates evil as far as it can (implication from 2)

24
Q

What is the FWD

A

1) God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent
2) evil exists
3) God creates a world containing moral goodness
4) And, it is possible that all possible persons suffer from trans world depravity
5) hence it is consistent with Theism and gods attributes (goodness and power) to actualize a world in which there is evil

25
Q

What is proposition C in FWD

A

1) God creates a world containing moral goodness
2) And, it is possible that all possible persons suffer from trans world depravity
3) hence it is consistent with Theism and gods attributes (goodness and power) to actualize a world in which there is evil

26
Q

What are Craigs two counters to Krauss counter to causal principle + further conversations

A

1) Craig: Quantum vacuum is not nothing

2) Craig: just because you cannot see a cause does not mean it isn’t there (observable cause does not equal actual cause)

Krauss: There is no reason to acknowledge a potential cause if there is no reason to believe that a cause exists

Craig: There is reason to believe that it has a cause if you believe in the causal principle

27
Q

what needs to be granted to grant the free will defence

A

1) incompatibalism about free will (free will and determinism are incompatible)
2) moral goodness presupposes freedom
3) consistent with theism for god to create a world containing moral goodness
4) its possible that every possible person suffers from transworld depravity

28
Q

expanded FWD

A

1) simple fwd
2) extend it to cover vast amount of evil
3) extending it to cover natural evil

29
Q

what is the quantitative FWD (step 2: extend it to cover vast amount of evil)

A

1) It is consistent with gods attributed to create a world with as much goodness as this world
2) it is possible that this amount of goodness couldn’t be had without this amount of evil
3) it is consistent with gods attributes to create a world containing this amount of evil

30
Q

what are the counters to the FWD

A

1) Mackie (it is limiting gods omnipotence to say that he cannot strongly actualize a world in which everyone freely does the right thing)

2) snyder hawthorne (TWS is as likely as TWD)

3) hume kraal (it is not necessarily consistent with gods attributes to create a world with this amount of goodness if the evil vastly outweighs the goodness)

31
Q

Further Responses to counters to FWD

1) Mackie

2) snyder hawthorne

3) hume kraal

A

1) Not limiting gods power as forcing someone to freely do something is a contradiction

2) TWS is not as likely based on rational intuition

3) Felix culpa: there cannot be more evil than goodness due to the sheer goodness of this action (Jesus sacrifice in Christianity)

32
Q

what are the major objections to god

A

1) problem of evil
2) coherence objections
3) hiddenness objections
4) redundancy objections
5) evidential objections

33
Q

what is the evidential argument from evil (William Rowe)

A

1) there exists pointless evil (evil that does not serve any purpose)
2) an all good/powerful/knowledgeable being would prevent the occurrence of pointless evil
3) but there is pointless evil
4) hence there is no such being

34
Q

What is Wykston’s skeptical theism (response to Rowe’s evidential argument) + counter

A

1) humans would only to assess whether there is pointless evil if they had access to the big picture
2) but humans dont have such access

counter:
1) skeptical theism implies moral paralysis

35
Q

what are the coherence objections

A

omnibenovlence: problem of evil

omnipotence: problem of the stone

omniscience: omniscience implies foreknowledge which implies lack of free will

36
Q

counters to coherence objection with omniscience (foreknowledge problem)

A

Cicero/Swinburne counter1: open theism - God does not know the future

Counter 2: Distinguish will/can happen (foreknowledge follows free choices/recognizes choices. You do not HAVE to eat a hamburger, but you will. Must means you cannot do otherwise, but god knows you will freely do it)

Buethius counter 3: strictly god has no foreknowledge (god knows everything now, god is timeless)

37
Q

what is the hiddeness objection

A

a perfectly loving god would make his existence known to people who didn’t know of him but wanted to know

38
Q

what is the redundancy objection (from epicureans)

A

1) we should always claim the simpler explanation (principle of simplicity)
2) naturalism is the simpler explanation

39
Q

counter for redundancy objection

A

naturalism is not the simpler explanation because nothing comes from nothing. God is required

40
Q

what are the different theistic stories

A

hume: need for happiness
Marx: class conflict
freud: cosmic dad

41
Q

plantinga counter to naturalistic arguments

A

(1)
these stories are just announced and not argued for

what if you dont find story plausible?

(2)
if naturalism is true, it makes sense to look for belief in god through natural means as those are The only ones that exist

if theism is true, god may influence thoughts to allow for belief in god

it is justifiable to think that god exists, and it is wrong to think that it is unjustified to think god doesn’t exist

42
Q

What is the Kalam cosmological argument

A

1) Causal Principle: Everything that begins to exist has a cause
2) The universe began to exist
3) Hence, the creation of the universe must have a distinct (*personal) cause

43
Q

What is philopunus two arguments

A

1) an actual infinity of real things is impossible
2) an actual infinity of real things (even if possible) would be impossible to traverse

44
Q

explain philoponus first argument (an actual infinity of real things is impossible)

A

1) if the world were eternal, the present moment would be preceded by an actual infinity of past moments
2) past events are real things
3) an actual infinity of real things is impossible
4) hence an actual infinity of past events is impossible (from 2,3)
5) hence, the world isn’t eternal (from 1 - 4)

45
Q

explain philoponus second argument (an actual infinity of real things (even if possible) would be impossible to traverse)

A

1) if the world were eternal, the present moment would be preceded by an actual infinity of past moments
2) but it is impossible to traverse, an actual infinity of past moments to arrive at the present
3) therefore, if the world were eternal, we wouldn’t have been able to arrive at the present moment
4) but we are in the present moment
5) hence, the world isn’t eternal

46
Q

What are the counters to the Cosmological Argument

A

1) Krauss: quantum vacuum
2) Hume: not intuitive
3) Bertrand Russell: set theory

47
Q

what is Bertrand Russels objection + assumptions to Cosmological argument

A

cantorian set theory proves that an actual infinity of real things is possible

1) numbers are real things (mathematical platonism)
2) consistency implies possibility

48
Q

What are Craigs two a posterori arguments for the universe having a beginning

A

1) thermodynamics law (if the universe always existed we would have already run out of energy)

(all energy goes to absolute zero (coffee cup example), everything runs out of energy)

2) big bang singularity (Hubble observation of expansion galaxy, shows that universe is expanding and started from a single point)

49
Q

What is Humes objection to the causal principle

A

we do not know the causal principle to be true

not intuitive

1) contradictions
2) resemblance
3) quantity
4) quality

50
Q

What are Krauss counter to causal principle

A

Krauss: Quantum Vacuum. Space void of matter that has atoms seemingly being
created out of nothing

51
Q

arguments for personal reasons over mechanical reason for creation of universe?

A

Craig: if the cause were mechanical, the effect would have to last as long as the cause (cause would have to be everlasting, which it is not)

Swinburne: laws of nature were created with the creation of the universe hence cannot apply with the creation of the universe itself

52
Q

Aristotle/Aquinas cosmological argument

A

1) the world is in a state of motion
2) Something else must cause the state of motion
3) The cause of the state of motion can also be something else in motion
4) This loop of movers causing movement cannot continue infinitum
5) There must exist an unmoved mover

53
Q

Arguments against Aristotle/Aquinas Cosmological argument

A

1) Bertrand Russell: brute fact: does not need explanation

2) Russell: why require an alternate explanation

3) Newtonian objection: rest and motion are equally natural states

54
Q

Leibniz cosmological argument

A

1) the world is in a state of contingent affairs
2) Something else must cause this contingency
3) That which causes the contingency may also be a contingency itself
4) This loop of contingencies causing contingencies cannot continue infinitum
5) There must exist a necessary being that exists creating the contingencies

55
Q

Argument against Leibniz cosmological argument

A

hume: conceivability implies possibility, whatever we conceive as existing we can conceive as not existing hence no neccesary being

56
Q

Clifford evidential objection

A

it is wrong to believe anything with insufficient evidence

ZZZ: Philosophy (13 decks)

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