Philosophy Of Religion Flashcards
What is the Classical Period
The time that Western Philosophy began in Ancient Greece
Who were some of the Greek Gods
Zeus,Poseidon,Apollo,Aphrodite
What is Reason
The process of thinking rationally
What was Thales main basic question
What is the world made of
What is the Pre-Socratic Era
Refers to theories and philosophies that circulated before the time of Socrates
What is the Socratic Era
A time of theories and philosophies that circulated during the time of Socrates as a result of his teachings
What were the main teachings of Socrates
How to ask Questions
“Ignorance if the only evil”
How did Socrates die
Was forced to drink a poisoned Hemlock by the Athenian Authorities
Why did Socrates die
Because the government of Athens did not like Socrates shredding their rules and ideas through his own logics and teachings
What is meant by” the only thing I know is nothing”
It means that no matter how many facts,figures and theories you know they are always merely surface level and always a deeper meaning to things
What is meant by Ignorance is the only evil
The inability to distinguish between right and wrong in your surroundings allows evil to subside causing chaos and calamity
What was the school Plato opened called
The Academy
Who was Plato’s Student
Aristotle
What was the school that Aristotle opened called
The Lyceum
Difference between Aristotle and Plato’s philosophy
Aristotle’s philosophy was more down to Earth as he was fascinated by science and nature
Plato’s was more outer worldly
When was Thales born
624 BCE
When was Pythagoras born
571 BCE
When was Socrates born
470 BCE
When was Plato born
427 BCE
When was Aristotle born
384 BCE
Who was Aristotle’s famous and powerful student
Alexander the Great
Epistemology
The study of knowledge
Knowledge
Is an objective truth
Belief
Is subjective and based on a person’s perspectives and feelings
Priori
Knowledge known prior to sense experience. This is considered to be objectively true knowledge
A Posteriori
Is knowledge gained from observation and sense experience
What is posteriori also known as
Empirical knowledge because it makes use of real world evidence
What is the School of Athens
Is a painting by Raphael commissioned in 1514 by Pope Julius
Who was Plato
Is the first rational philosopher manning he relies purely on reason and believed the universe are knowable by mind alone
What was Heraclitus’ influence on Plato
Plato was interested by the teaching of Heraclitus that says that the physical world is constantly in flux
Heraclitus’ example on everlasting change
“Can you step into the same river twice”
Doxa
Beliefs and opinions
World Of Appearances
Temporal and Spatial
Constantly Changing
Physical And Imperfect
Superficial
World Of Forms
Transcendent
Immutable
Eternal
Perfect
Real and Absolute-Not opinion
What did Plato believe about the understanding of Forms
Believed humans have an innate understanding of Forms and recognise them even if we do not realise it
What did Plato believe about the Soul
Believed it resided in World of Form before becoming human
Anamnesis
All learning is simply a recollection of Forms
What did Plato believe about the arrangement of the Forms
Believed they were arranged in a hierarchy
The Form of the Good
Is the purest most abstract and furthest from the physical world
What did Plato believe about ingnorance
“Ignorance is the cause of immorality”. As his teacher was Socrates he also stated “Ignorance is the only evil”
How did Plato use teachings of Pythagoras into his theory
As the Pythagorean were fascinated with proportionality so was Plato. He believed in each form we have features that are proportion to the form.
What do we need in the WOA
Eyes to See Objects
Light From the Sun to illuminate objects
What do we need in the WOF
Our intellect to appreciate the form
The form of the good to illuminate our understanding
What did Plato think of democracy
He condemned it as it is the rule of the majority and the majority rule by their senses rather than reason
Abstract
Existing in thought or as an idea but without a physical existence
Examples of Higher Forms
Truth
Beauty
Justice
Why did Plato distrust sense
All things are experienced through sense are particular things. Our knowledge of them is mixed. Some is correct some is incorrect and some is incomplete
Analogy
Story in which each feature has a symbolic meaning
Elitism
If only philosopher are capable of being good then only they should rule
What do the prisoners represent in Plato’s Cave
Ordinary people in our world
What do the cave represent in Plato’s Cave
Our world of appearances/the empirical world
What do the chains represent in Plato’s Cave
The senses that trap us and deceive us
What do the shadows represent in Plato’s Cave
Our everyday experiences
What do the fire represent in Plato’s Cave
Resembles the sun that allows us to see objects
What do the escapee represent in Plato’s Cave
The philosopher that is able to acquire true knowledge
What does the difficult ascent represent in Plato’s Cave
The road to knowledge that is difficult
What does the outside world represent in Plato’s Cave
Resembles the world of the forms
What does the sun represent in Plato’s Cave
The Form of the Good
What does the return to the cave represent in Plato’s Cave
The philosopher fells the duty to tell others even though they are close minded
What does the difficulty in adjusting to the darkness represent in Plato’s Cave
Once the philosopher knows the truth it’s difficult to experience the world as an ordinary person
What does the persecution of others represent in Plato’s Cave
Like Socrates the philosopher will be ridiculed and threatened
Who was Aristotle
He was the Plato’s best student however rejected many of his teacher’s views of the world. Aristotle believed knowledge can be achieved through experience and observations.
Why was Aristotle named the “First Scientist”
Because he was the first to categorise everything and try to describe what he saw. (Relying on observation)
Motus
Refers to constant motion in the world
Aristotle’s main aims
Why everything is in a constant change and motion?
How things maintain their identity through change?
Actuality
What a thing is or does
Potentiality
What a thing can become/it’s future potential
What are the 4 Causes of Aristotle
Material Cause
Efficient Cause
Formal Cause
Final Cause
Material Cause
The matter that something is made out of eg: wood,metal,alloys
Efficient Cause
The process of something coming into existence eg: The World=God
Formal Cause
The shape,form or characteristic of an object eg a ring is circular
Final Cause
It describes the purpose of something and why it is here
What does Aristotle believe about purpose
Claims everything in the universe has a purpose such as trees,leaves,animals. This includes every human body part. He also believes humans do things for a purpose eg listen to music because it’s relaxing,hitting someone because they are annoying etc.
What does Aristotle believe about goodness
Claims goodness is intristic. This enables us to determine wether something is good or not eg a good knife is one that cuts well
What 2 questions did Aristotle ask when thinking about the universe as a whole
What is the purpose of the universe as a whole
What causes objects in the universe to actualise their potential
What kind of view did Aristotle have on the universe
A Geocentric View meaning everything revolves around earth
How is Aristotle’s Universe Structured
He believed there were 40 rings in the universe. The first ring moved the second and the second ring moved the third etc. At the 40th ring he believed was moved by a being called the Prime Mover/God
What is the purpose of the Prime Mover
keep the universe in motion
How does the Prime Mover move the 40th ring
The 40th ring is attracted by the Prime Mover’s perfection
Characteristics of the Prime Mover
Not Contingent
Perfect
Eternal
Has no potential
Cannot Contemplate
Immaterial
Impassive
Empiricism
The use of the real world and evidence to draw conclusions
Rationalism
The view that regards reason reason as the chief source and test of knowledge
Dualistic
Soul and body are 2 separate substances
Psyche
Soul
Soul
Is the real essential immortal part of ourselves that never dies
What does Plato believe happen before reincarnation
Believes the soul travels to the WOF and witness true knowledge
What happens to the soul in the afterlife
The Myth Of Er by Socrates explains everything
What is the Myth of Er
Is the story of a man who dies and goes to the world of the forms and witnesses true knowledge however instead of reincarnating to another body he is brought back into his old self to tell everyone what happens after death
Plato’s Argument of Opposites
Plato argues that every quality comes into being from opposites. Without dark we wouldn’t know light and without cold we wouldn’t know hot
Qualities of the Soul
Part of the WOF
Eternal/Immortal
Immutable
Episteme
Qualities of the body
Part of the empirical world
Decay,Change,Die
Temporary
Physical and Material
Senses/Doxa
Plato’s Argument from Recollection
Futher evidence that the soul is separate from body is the ability of a human to recollect things from the WOF after they saw true knowledge and things of past lives. The Slave Boy illustrates this well
The Slave Boy
Illustrates by telling a story of a slave boy who had no education and is given a geometry puzzle to solve. Through questioning by Socrates the boy is able to solve the puzzle through recollection of previous experience
Criticisms of Recollection
Modern Philosopher Peter Geach argues how a disembodied soul can ‘see’ true knowledge if there are no senses
Conflict Within the Soul
Inner Conflict and Plato says there are 3 aspects within the soul; Reason Emotion and Desire/Appetite
The Charioteer Analogy
The soul is like a charioteer in charge of 2 horses. The Charioteer represents reason and the 2 wayward horses represent out emotions and appetites. The soul is in harmony when reason is in control. Reason can be used to overcome emotion
Aristotle’s View on the soul
Rejects that the body and soul are 2 separate substances. He concludes humans are made up of matter and psyche
Monism
Is what Aristotle is. The body and soul are in unity meaning there is no life after death
Aristotle gives 2 illustrations as to why the soul cannot exist without a body
If we imagine an axe to be a living thing then the soul would be its ability to chop wood
If we imagine an eye to be a living thing it’s soul would be the capacity to see
Aristotle’s Hierarchy of Souls
A vegetative soul
A perceptive soul
An intellectual soul
A vegetative soul
Which plants have. The capability of nourishment/to reproduce
A perceptive soul
Which animals have in that they have senses with which they experience the world
An intellectual soul
Which humans have. The ability to distinguish between right and wrong
Consciousness
Self awareness that we have thoughts,feelings,desires,imagination;an inner life. Our unique perception of the world
Thinking
Is the process by which a human has the ability to use their mind’s consciousness to asses a particular situation
What is the Mind-Body Problem
How can something as strange as consciousness be explained?
Is my mind separate from my body?
If so how do my mind and body interact?
Rene Descartes
17th Century Philosopher
Descartes’ View of mind and body
“I think therefore I am”
Scepticism
A questioning approach which does not take assumptions for granted
First Certainty of Descartes
“If I think I must exist”
Substance Dualism
That body and soul are 2 separate substances
Problems for Descartes
If the mind and body are separate how do they interact so closely? How does immaterial and material co-exist?
Descartes’ Solution
Descartes came to the conclusion that the pineal gland was the point at which body and soul interact. His reading was that every body part has 2 subsections such as arms legs brain however there was only 1 pineal gland
Gilbert Ryle
Was an analytical philosopher meaning he was interested how we use language to describe reality
What did Ryle accuse Descartes of doing
Accused him of committing a category error
Category Error
Using language incorrectly; treating something as being of one type when it is a different type
The Ghost in the Machine
Ryle uses the term Ghost in the machine to argue that it is not possible for a non-physical substance to work a physical substance. This was to retaliate against Descartes view that the mind is pilot of the body
3 examples to illustrate Descartes Category Error
A foreign student visits Cambridge University and is shown the classrooms library and sports hall but at the end he asks “where is the university”. In the example the person has made a mistake by assuming there was more than they saw.
The Ontological Argument
Attempt to prove God’s existence through a priori argument
St.Anselm
Wrote an ontological argument. Was a Catholic Monk
What did Anselm say about the fool
Only a fool in his heart says there is no God
What is Anselm’s Definition of God
Than that which nothing greater can be conceived
Anselm’s Ontological Argument Premises Version 1
P1:God exists as an idea in our mind
P2:A being that exists in reality is greater than an imaginary being
P3:If God only exists in the mind he would not be the greatest being
P4:Therefore God must exist in the mind and Reality
What example does Anselm use for premise 2
Uses the example of a painter painting. The painting on paper looks better than imagined by the painter
Criticisms of Anselm’s Premise 1
Does not define what greatness is
How do we know God is the greatest thing
Criticisms of Anselm’s Premise 2
Gaunilo argues painter is a poor analogy. There’s a big difference between the paining in the mind than the finished product
Criticisms of Anselm’s Premise 3
Anselm is saying that everything that exists in the mind must exist in reality
Strengths of Anselm’s Argument
Succeeds as it is deductive and clear conclusions can be drawn from it
It’s a priori nature offers room for logical debate through actual proof
Weaknesses of Anselm’s Argument
If the argument is applied to anything else but God the conclusion would be illogical
A priori knowledge is common knowledge therefor each individual must have a different perception of God
Why did Gaunilo call his work “on behalf of the fool”
Because Gaunilo puts himself in the shoes of a rational unbeliever
Why is it significant Gaunilo is a monk
Gaunilo is a believer in God however was simply trying to prove the illogical nature of Anselm’s argument rather than disprove God
What analogy did Gaunilo use to disprove Anselm
Perfect Island Analogy
Analogy of the Perfect Island
If the perfect island did not exist that would be a contradiction to call it the perfect island for the perfect island would not be perfect if it existed only in mind and not reality
Gaunilo’s Main Criticisms of the Ontological Argument
Anselm’s Ontological fails because logic of the same kind would force one to conclude many things exists which they certainly do not
How does Anselm respond to Gaunilo
Anselm says that the island is contingent and that it depends on other things to exist such as trees,mountains,sand and sea. However God is supremely necessary and is dependant on nothing hence why the ontological argument exclusively applies to him
What is John Hick’s Point
If I add one grain of sand to the perfect island would it be imperfect? It is undefinable. Also your perfect island may be different to make as I am not fond of coconuts therefore wouldn’t want the palm trees to bear coconuts.
Reduction Ad Absurdum
Assures a position
Follows the argument structure and derives an absurd outcome
Concludes the original argument is absurd and wrong
Contingent
Relies on something for its existence
Necessary
Not reliant on anything for its existence
Anselm’s in response to Gaunilo
Anselm accuses Gaunilo of misplacing his logic. The ontological argument only works for God for He alone is necessary in existence
Anselm’s Second Version of the Ontological Argument
This is similar to the first version however Anselm alters the the premises to make them clearer and emphasising that contingent beings and objects do no work and only God can be applied to the premises
Reasons why Gaunilo’s Criticisms are successful
When the premises are applied to anything they give an absurd outcome
Gaunilo’s Criticisms do not work
The premises only work on God as He is the only necessary whereas things such as an island are contingent and rely on other factors for their existence
Innatist
people are born with ready made ideas regarding God
Descartes’ Ontological Argument
God is a supremely perfect being
A supremely perfect being contains supremely perfect characteristics
Existence is an essential characteristic of a supremely perfect being
God’s existence if logically necessary. Therefor God exists
Meditations 5 Descartes quote
“I cannot conceive God without existence”
Descartes’ Reasoning
Existence cannot be separated from the essence of God. He gives 2 examples
-A triangle: must have angled adding to 180° this is the essence of the triangle. Without it the triangle would cease to exist
-A mountain
Kant’s Critique
Existence if not a predicate
Predicate
Is the part of a sentence that gives us information or expands out knowledge of the object
Support for Kant
Moore: agreed with Kant that existence cannot be used as a predicate. We are given these 2 statements:
-Some tame tigers do no growl
-Some tame tigers do no exist
Only the first statement has a meaningful feature because it is an actual trait
Bertrand Russell also agrees
Aquinas’ Transitional Error
Argues that Anselm made a transitional error. He says that Anselm was wrong to move from the definition of God to the existence of God
Hume’s Criticisms of Anselm’s OA
Rejected the whole concept of necessary existence. He believed that existence could only ever be contingent/dependant. You cannot define God into existence
Support for the ontological argument
Leibniz: argued that since God posses all perfect qualities He must exist because if He had all the perfections and not exist He would be meaningless
Malcom: that God as ‘than that which nothing greater can be conceived’ must exist
Kant’s Criticisms
2 Main Objections:
-Statements about existence are synthetic not analytic
-Existence is not a predicate
Synthetic statements
Statements which require external evidence to be proven true or false
Analytical statements
Statements which are true by definition. For example the triangle and the mountain
Kant’s Second Objection example
The 100 Thales (coins) Example. Asks us to imagine 100 silver coins. The imaginary coins do no add anymore coins than what is already in my hand
Malcolm’s Ontological Argument
If God doesn’t exist He cannot come into existence therefore His existence is impossible. However if God exists He cannot come out of existence and His existence is Necessary
Malcolm’s Ontological Argument Premises
God’s existence is either necessary or impossible
God’s existence is not impossible since it isn’t contradictory
God’s existence is necessary
Alvin Plantinga’s Ontological Argument
Uses modal logic
Telos
Purpose
Teleological arguments
Also referred to as design argument. They come from the natural world also known as natural theology they point out:
-Order in the world
-Beauty of nature
-Purpose
-Complexity
Summa Teleologica
A writing which Aquinas put forward his teleological argument in an attempt to understand God by drawing on multiple beliefs and religions
2 ways existence of God can be demonstrated according to Aquinas
Natural Theology
Revelation
Romans 1:19
“God’s power and divinity is clear from what has been made”
The Five Ways
The First 3 are cosmological arguments
The Fourth way relates to moral argument
The Fifth way is a teleological argument
Cicero- De Natura Dearum
“What could be more clear or obvious when we look up to the sky and contemplate the heavens than that there is some divinity of superior intelligence”
Philebus And Timaeus
Writing by Plato on teleological arguments
Modern Versions of the teleological argument
William Paley’s Watch Analogy
F.R Tennant’s Anthropic Principle
Aquinas’ Teleological Premises
- We see things in existence that lack intelligence such as plants
- We can observe that these objects act to benefit themselves eg plants looking towards sun for photosynthesis
- An object which lack intelligence cannot act to benefit itself unless it is directed to do so by something intelligent
C. Just as an arrow requires an archer. Nature requires a designer to explain it
William Paley on teleological arguments
“There cannot be design unless there is a designer. Arrangement, disposition or parts, subservience of means to an end imply the presence of intelligence or mind”
Paley’s teleological premises
- If one found a watch on a beach, observation of it would suggest purpose and design in its manufacture
- Objects in nature can be observed which suggest purpose and design
- Anything that can be observed to be designed must have a designer
C. Nature demonstrates that existence of a designer which we call God
Paley’s conclusions- how is the universe like a watch?
Both possess complex features and parts
Each feature/part has a function
All the parts work together for a purpose
Paley’s examples for purpose in nature
The complexity of the human eye
The lacteal system
The Swan’s Neck
Empirical evidence of a designer according to Paley
Regularity and Order of the planets
Rotation of the planets
The Seasons
Criticisms of Paley’s teleological thinking
We may be in ignorance of how watched are made
Watches sometimes go wrong
Some parts of the watch appear to have no purpose
Paley’s responses to criticisms of his thinking
We don’t have to see how a watch is made to know it was created
A watch doesn’t have to work perfectly to come to the conclusion of a creator
The purpose of some parts may simply not be discovered yet
David Hume’s Challenges to natural theology
Wrote a book ‘Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion’ written as a discussion between functional philosophers
Criticisms 1: Analogy doesn’t work
Hume points out analogies can lead to mistaken conclusions
Analogy works by arguing that because x is like y in one respect they may be alike
Epicurean Hypothesis
States that given an infinite amount of time, a finite number of particles may eventually fall into order by chance
Empedocles
was a philosopher before Aristotle which stated “why do animals have sharp teeth at the front and flat teeth at the back” in a form of early acknowledgment of evolution
Natural Selection
An evolutionary advantage/adaptation through replication, random mutation, harsh conditions and aeons of time
Examples of natural selection
Giraffe’s long necks to reach trees.
Peacocks feathers larger and brighter to attract partners.
Thermophiles
Richard Dawkins the Blind Watchmaker
“Paley’s argument is made with passionate sincerity and is informed by the best scholarship of the day but it is wrong- gloriously and utterly wrong”
How do theists react to evolution
Liberal Christians: combine evolution with theism and state God is behind the process of evolution
Orthodox Christians: reject is as God is the creator of all
Tennant’s Aesthetic Argument
Argued that the human ability to appreciate and enjoy beauty, music and literature is evidence of a divine creator. Beauty is not necessary for survival therefore must have had a different origin than natural selection
The Anthropic Principle
Argue the universe is so exactly right for humans to live in it must have been designed. There is a higher chance of the universe not existing as it currently is than it existing in its current state.
Evidence to support the Anthropic Principle
The Big Bang had to occur exactly as it did. It it’s strength had varied there’d be no Big Bang
Precise balance in the constants that govern nature
The Earth is at a precise distance from the sun to support life
Challenges to the Anthropic Principle
Assumes the universe was made for humans. However most of the planets in the universe are cold bleak and uninhabitable.
Ancient Philosophical Influences Topic Summary
Aristotle
.Empiricist
.Heraclitus- can you step in the same river twice?
.Was named the first scientist
.4 Causes- Material,Formal,Efficient,Final
.The Prime Mover- geocentric view of the world composed of 40 rings. The Perfect,Immutable,Transcendent being moved the 40th circle through his perfection
.The Stick and Rock Analogy
.Richard Dawkins
Plato
.Rationalist
.Plato’s Forms (World Of Appearances and World Of The Forms)
.Plato’s Cave Analogy
.Hierarchy of the Forms (Form of the Good, Higher Goods, Lower Goods, Particulars)
.Form of the Good= Justice Wisdom Peace
.Believed in reincarnation and that the soul goes to the WOF where we see true knowledge
.Rational Thinkers argue how can you ‘see’ in the WOF if there are no senses
.Distrusted the senses as they deceive us
Mysticism
The sense of contact with the divine or transcendent
Christian Mystics
Teresa Of Avila
Julian of Norwich
Bernadette of Lourdes
William James’ studies on mysticism
Believes religious experiences should be at the centre of religion. Teachings and doctrine seen as ‘second hand religion’
Who was William James
Psychologist who researched religious and mystical experiences
Aims of James’ studies
Approached from a secular viewpoint and aimed to separate legit experiences from bogus ones
Characteristics of mystical experiences
Passive- not in control of what happens to them
Ineffable- cannot be expressed in words/ Teresa of Avila
Noetic- receives new knowledge/ St Bernadette
Transient- experience passes quick
Conversion experience
Where an individual goes from no religion to a faith or from one faith to another
Peter Cole describes a conversion experience as going from believing to trusting
Pragmatic view of conversion experience
Believes the conversion is the fruit of someone’s life and that it gives the experience value
Pluralism
Believes that more than one faith or source can be used to know God
William James’ definition of conversion
To be converted is to be regenerated, to receive grace, to experience religion, to gain assurance, one so many phrases which denote the process, gradual or sudden by which a self hitherto divided”
General Features of a conversion experience
Is is a process
It is gradual or sudden
It is transforming
The divided self becomes a unified self
Symptoms of conversion
The loss of worry
An ecstasy of happiness
Are religious experiences proof God exists
William James’ gives an open ended response that quenches the needs of both believer and non-believer:
Concludes REs do not prove the existence of God. A positive change may occur because the person believes they have met God. It is a placebo.
Leaves the possibility for God by stating the effect of the experience points to a higher power
Psychological explanations of REs
James states that anyone can have a religious experience. They are common eg Yoogi Indians
Schleiermacher also argues that REs are natural to humans because we have an innate sense of God (Calvinistic thought)
Challenges to supernatural explanations
Kant and critics point out that people interpret REs in a way that matches their own belief. If the experience is legitimate 2 different people should describe a similar experience
Strengths of William James’ view
Helps us distinguish between real and false experiences
Can help strengthen faith
Weaknesses of William James’ view
Anthony Flew says James’ views seem to be too dependent on the interests, backgrounds and expectations of those who have them rather than anything separate or autonomous
Generalises. Not all experiences must have something in common
Questions raised
Is God only at work in certain faiths
Are some experiences false
Numinous Experience
A new type of experience coined by Rudolph Otto.
What does a numinous experience feel like
Otto describes it as ‘mysterium tremendum et fascinas’ which means mysterious, tremendous and fascinating. This feeling enables an individual to feel their insignificance compared to God. Helps individuals appreciate that God is ‘wholly other’
Do Numinous experiences prove God exists?
According to Rudolph Otto religious numinous experiences are the strongest reason for concluding God exists as the experience is external
Indirect religious experiences
Otto also believes direct contact with God is not necessary to experience an RE. Eg countryside in the early morning or witnessing the birth of a baby.
Scholars that argue for a purely psychological explanation of REs
Ludwig Feuerbach
Sigmund Freud
Ludwig Feuerbach’s view on REs
“God is an invention”
States attributes of God are part human and in order for humans to feel supported they created God as an example to live up to
“God is man in large letters”
Sigmund Freud views on REs
“Religion is an illusion”: theists cannot handle adult life therefore have ‘infantile neurosis’ to have a parent figure to look up to
Physiological experiences
Hallucinations
Responses
Brain Stimulation
Epilepsy
Hallucinations
Drugs, alcohol and vitamin deficiencies have mind altering properties
Responses
Theists argue it is necessary to go through a difficult time such as fasting to contact the divine. Perhaps God would want to make himself known to someone in a vulnerable state as a form of encouragement
Brain Stimulation
‘The God Helmet’ developed by Michael Persinger emitted magnetic signals to the brain. Participant reported similar experiences as religious experiences
Some may reject this as the participants may have been easily malleable
Karl Marx on religious experiences
“Opium of the people. Believed religion was to suppress the people and that REs are a part of that.
Richard Swineburne on religious experiences
Believed personal testimonies of REs should be taken just as seriously as any other experience. Proposed 2 principles:
-Principle of credulity
-Principle of testimony
Principle of testimony
States that experienced should have the benefit of the doubt and that it is up to the questioner to prove the testimony wrong
P1: I have heard sincere reports from other people of their experiences of God
P2: I have no reason to doubt the genuineness of these reports
C: therefore they must have experienced God
Principle of credulity
We should trust our own experiences, our senses and accept what appears to be the case; unless we have evidence to the contrary
Credulity
Willingness to believe
Prior probability
If the existence of something is highly improbable then we should be sceptical of reports to have seen them
Corporate Religious Experience
Corporate religious experiences are when people report having the same, or similar, experience at the same time
Medjugorje
In the town of Medjugorje in Bosnia Herzegovina, from 1981 onwards, six teenagers and children reported regular visions of the Virgin Mary, each claiming that the Virgin Mary revealed secrets to them.
Explanations to the medjugorje
they interpreted the event incorrectly - describing the Virgin Mary in the same way because they had been brought up knowing what statues of her looked like.
influenced each other’s memories of events
Charismatic Christianity
A form of Christianity that emphasises the work of the Holy Spirit
Evangelical Christianity
A worldwide movement (mostly Protestant) in which there is a strong emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit.
The Toronto Blessing
In the 1990’s, people worshipping together at the Toronto Vineyard Airport Church claim to have the same religious experience. The most widely reported part was worshippers:
Breaking into uncontrollable laughter
Weeping and shrieking
Speaking in tongues - strange ‘languages’
Explanations to the Toronto blessing
Mass Hysteria
Social Conformity
Group Hallucinations
Was Pentecost a literal event?
Some argue that it was a literal event that the disciples felt great winds and saw tongues of fire
Others say that wind and fire are used by Luke to symbolise power and zeal with which the disciples were inspired with
Others also say disciples got carried away with emotion as it was so in after Jesus died
Questions raised about God and the Toronto Blessing
Why would God reveal himself in such strange ways which do not reveal knowledge about him? Surely it would be more useful to communicate through miracles or messages?
The problem of evil
Philosophers have identified 2 main sources of evil:
.Moral Evil
.Natural Evil
Moral Evil
Misuse of free will/ human on human. Act or omission
Natural Evil
Natural disasters and causes that result in tragedy
2 main problems of evil
Philosophers have identified 2 problems of evil:
The logical problem
The Evidential problem
The Inconsistent Triad
A triangle coined by Mackie with 2 of God’s qualities on 2 ends and evil and suffering on one end. States if 2 of the positions are existent the third is impossible
Problems with the inconsistent triad
Not good as it doesn’t include all qualities of God
Who identified the first problem of evil
Epicurus
Thomas Aquinas on problem of evil
Name of God means infinite goodness. If God existed there would be no evil, however evil resides ultimately questioning the existence of God
David Hume on problem of evil
Called the problem of evil “the rock of atheism”. However some critics state for atheists the problem of evil is no issue as all the event deemed as ‘evil’ are blind chance or simply humans
The Evidential Problem of evil
the evidential approach tries to show that given the evil in the world, it is improbable that there is an omnipotent, omniscient, and wholly good God. Philosophers believe you need to simply to look around to conclude God doesn’t exist as a totally powerful being could have made the world totally painless
John Stuart Mill’s Evidential Argument
States evil and suffering is enough evidence to prove that no benevolent God exists. Believes God is more sadistic than loving.
“Nature crushes them with stone like the first Christian Martyr”
Condemns God and nature for the world’s pain, suffering and cruelty
3 main types of solutions to the problem of evil
Abandon traditional theism
Evil is necessary for a greater good
Evil is the responsibility of humans
The last 2 solutions preserve theism- these are called theodicies
Augustine’s Theodicy
Dubbed the original perfection
P1: goodness is intrinsic to everything in the universe and everything has its own scale of goodness
P2: God made everything good “He saw what he made and it was good”- Genesis 1
P3: Evil occurs when something does not live up to the expected goodness
P4: a ‘lack’ or privation is not a thing in itself (Priortio Boni)
C: evil is a lack of goodness- not a thing God created
Moral Evil
Augustine states moral evil was coined during the Fall the moment Adam and Eve chose to disobey God. Believed original sin and evil is seminally present in Adam therefore a transmission of sin is in effect
Natural Evil
The fall of the angels (Lucifer or Satan) caused disharmony and imbalance in nature, which led to natural disasters such as hurricanes and tsunamis
Aquinas added that natural evil might only be evil because of the way we look at the world
Do humans go to heaven or hell based on Augustine Theodicy?
Since God is no responsible for evil, God is justified in punishing people
Augustine’s Theodicy is ‘soul deciding’ because people who follow Jesus’ teachings will go to heaven whereas those who reject it go to Hell
Process Theology
Belief that God is no separate from creation but is developing with it- influencing events but not determining them
Augustine’s Aesthetic Theodicy
Augustine suggest that evil is a part of the natural balance of the universe. Augustine draws an analogy with the use of an artist makes light and dark shading to improve a painting in order to create a balance
Criticisms of Augustine’s Theodicy
Vast amount of suffering undergone by animals that appear to be balanced by nothing
Augustine has to justify eternal pain of humans who are punished and go to Hell. By throwing evil-doers into hell Augustine has migrated the problem of evil to the afterlife
Contrast Theory
Belief that without evil we would be unable to recognise good and Summum Bonum
Strengths of Augustine’s Theodicy
The idea of privation supported by H.Mcabe shows God did not create evil but is simply the lack of something
Aquinas’ idea that we only see evil because of the way we look at the world
Free will is the cause of all suffering rather than God
Weaknesses of Augustine’s Theodicy
If evil is the lack of something, why has God allowed the lack of something to begin with
If God knows everything then why did He create the world knowing we would sin through free will. Friedrich Schleiermacher stated he could not find a motive for the angels to sin unless they were imperfect in the first place
Irenaus’ response to the problem of evil
Irenaus agues God created the world with a mixture of good and evil
Irenaus’ image of God
Point out the distinction between image and likeness arguing humans were created in the image of God. By this he means we are personal beings capable of rational and moral thinking
Irenaus on likeness of God
States God didn’t create humans in his likeness. By likeness Irenaus means personal qualities that reflect the divine life such as compassion, maturity and goodness. All portrayed by the person of Christ
How can we achieve God’s likeness
Irenaus sees evil in the world as a way God facilitates moral and spiritual growth. Sees hell as a place where people who do not cooperate with God’s plan go
Why not make us perfect from the beginning
If God created humans with perfection it would be meaningless. To be good is an effort of will and resisting evil. If God had to intervene every time we made a mistake we would never learn eg
Presents us with the analogy of a mother feeding a new born baby; the baby is not developed enough to be given an adult diet immediately
How does Irenaus explain the Adam and Eve story
Takes a more mythical approach than Augustine. Moral evil is simply the result of bad and immature choices made by humans. Natural evil are intentional difficulties for each individual which provide a testing ground to develop from immaturity to maturity
Irenaus’ theodicy is ‘soul-making’
Hick’s developments to Irenaus’ ideology
Believes we were created good but not perfect in the image of God to develop into ‘likeness of God’ through evil and suffering
The Hidden God
Believes God has kept himself at an epistemically distance to allow humans to make free choices
Life after death in accordance to Hick
Hick states theodicy only works if you believe in life after death. Hardships in this life must be justified by good things in the next
Universal Salvation
Hick believed everyone will go to Heaven (this ideology stemmed from working with a multi-faith population)
Could not accept that that a loving God would condemn people for eternity. Idea of hell contributes to the problem of evil
Natural evil in accordance to Hick
States the world must have some ‘rough edges’ and not a ‘hedonistic paradise’. Refers to the world as the ‘vale of soul-making’
Strengths of soul-making theodicies
Allow a non-literal approach to genesis- suits modern society
Presents evil as an actual thing god is responsible for rather than a privation
Nietzsche: “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger
Psychologist state that when exposed to trauma we grow resilience and confidence
Criticisms of soul-making theodicies
Dostoyewski in his book The Brothers Karamazov presented the most challenging attack against the theological God- suffering of children
God would not plan evil and suffering- D.Z Phillips
Good doesn’t always come out of evil- Hick and the Dysteological suffering
Instrumentalism
The belief that something value depends on its usefulness as in Irenaus and Hick’s ideology
Scholars analysis and conclusions of soul-making
Swinburne uses logical contradiction
Mary Baker states evil and suffering do not exist as they are a construct of the mind
Attribute
A quality or characteristic
Attributes of God
Transcendent
Eternal
Omniscient,Omnipotent,Omnibenevolent,Omnipresent
Just and Judge
Immutable
Immanent
Creator
Merciful
Plato’s Influence on Christian Teaching
There is an eternal realm where we live after death
Sensual pleasure should not be sole purpose in life
There is a separate body and soul
The WOF has similar characteristics as God
Aristotle’s Influence on Christian Teaching
God is immutable, eternal and transcendent outside the 40th Ring
The universe and everything exists for a purpose (telos)
God is the cause and purpose of everything in the universe
Jewish Influences
The God in the Old Testament is anthropomorphised (made to seem like a human being in that:
.He makes demands of people
.Intervenes in the world as if he’s human
.Passes judgment, gives warning and makes promises
.Seems to have thoughts and feelings
God as Omnipotent
Regarded as the most crucial aspect of the faith as ontological arguments by Descartes and Anselm rely on God having perfect power
-TTWNGCBC
Support for God as omnipotent
Creation Ex Nihilo where God creates the universe from nothing
The Incarnation which consists of the virgin birth and person of Christ
Human Salvation
Mackie on God’s Omnipotence
The Paradox of the Stone coined by Mackie states that “can God create a stone heavy enough for Him to be unable to lift it”
Mackie states God being all-powerful is incoherent. If God cannot do all things then omnipotence is not an attribute of God
Is God’s Omnipotence limited by logic
Rene Descartes argues that God can do anything including the logically impossible. God is not limited to anything. This however leads to absurd outcomes.
Misuse of language
.For Aquinas our statements are nonsense and logically impossible. God can do all things logically possible, within these limits God’s power is boundless:
-God can do everything within His nature which doesn’t contradict reason
-God cannot sin as it contradicts his nature
Support for Aquinas
.John McQuarrie: we only know power from our limited human world and is fallible
.Richard Swineburne: agrees with Aquinas
.Peter Vardy states God limits his powers for our benefit
God as omniscient
Bible evidence of God’s omniscience:
“Before a word is on my tongue you know about it Good Lord”
.God cannot be mistaken
.God has complete wisdom (knows the right thing to do)
.God knows everything there is nothing He cannot know
.God knows thins unavailable to the human mind
The problem of free will
The problem with God’s omniscience is combined with human free will
.Brian Davies puts it like this:
-God is omniscient so he knows everything
-If God knows that a future event is going to happen then that event has to happen otherwise God would be wrong
-The event cannot not happen- the event is necessary
-For human action to be free it cannot be necessary
-Therefore if God is truly omniscient, human actions are not free
John Calvin on God’s omniscience
.Coined the doctrine of predestination- where God already knows who is going to Heaven and Hell before the person is even born
-Critics stare this is not compatible with the view that God is merciful
.If God works on reward and punishment, it is immoral to punish someone for a predetermined action
Why is free will so important
If we simply play out what has already been decided then we are nothing but robots
-Most theodicies rely on the fact God gave humans free will
Friedrich Schleiermacher’s Answer to the problem of free will
.States God knows us so well He can predict the things we will do. He presents with the example of him and his daughter going to eat out, he can predict what she will choose
-Critics states we cannot use this analogy as God doesn’t make guesses or mistakes
Nietzsche on God’s Omniscience
Nietzsche believes God’s omniscience is indecent as he gives us the analogy of the little girl
Boethius’ solution to the problem of omniscience
.Boethius was a Christian Roman Philosopher
-He put forward an explanation to uphold omniscience and human free will
God’s Eternity
.The belief God has no beginning and no end
-Early thinkers like Augustine believed a perfect being like God will have eternal existence
-“I am the alpha and the omega, the first and the last”
Questions of whether God is eternal
.Inside time and space
.Alongside the universe
.Outside the universe
-Early thinkers decided God was eternal in a timeless, space less way
-Aquinas later argued this must not be the case, God would have to be outside time and space in order to create the universe
Boethius’ Solution
.Puts forward a new concept of eternity
-P1: humans exist in time and are finite
-P2: however God is eternal and atemporal. No past, present or future for God
-P3: so Gos being outside of time He views the whole of time simultaneously
-P4: Boethius calls this God’s ‘simultaneous present’- everything is now for God
Boethius’ Example to simultaneous present
Boethius puts forward an example of a man who goes on a walk on a sunny day
What does Boethius conclude about God’s knowledge
Boethius concludes God doesn’t have foreknowledge but ‘providential knowledge’
-Aquinas supports Boethius’ view by putting forward an example of a tower on a hill
Boethius’ Writing
In his writing the ‘Consolation of Philosohpy’. It is written as a conversation between himself and an imaginary lady who visits him to explore all sorts of philosophical puzzles. Hence the name ‘Lady Philosophy’
Strengths of Boethius’ Solution
.Successfully defends God and the problem of free will
.God’s omnipotence is upheld as well as human free will
.It makes sense that a timeless God would be immutable
Weaknesses of Boethius’ Solution
.Brings about absurd outcomes
.How could God incarnate as Jesus if He exists outside of time?
What does Anselm believe about Boethius’ Solution
Believes Boethius left 2 areas unexplained:
-What does it mean for God to be timeless (atemporal)
-How does God’s timelessness relate to the world around us
Anselm’s Four Dimensionalism
.Height,Width,Depth are the three dimensions that limit humans. Anselm proposes time is the fourth dimension
-Anselm states we live in the a presentist way- limited by time as we live relative to past and future
-God exists in the complete opposite way
Four Dimensionalism
The view time and space exist in the 4 dimensions and that all times are present to God
Anselm’s Development to Boethius
.Anselm says that time is in God because God created time. He says “all of past, present and future are contained in God”
-Anselm attempts resolve the problem of remoteness by proposing God has 2 types of knowledge:
-Preceding Knowledge
-Following Necessity
Preceding Knowledge
Knowledge dependant upon physical laws
Following Necessity
God knows individual choices as a following necessity. This means God is alongside humans in the moment of free choice
God’s Immanence
.Anselm states part of God’s perfection is that although He is transcendent, He is also immanent and knowable
-God chose to create free humans therefore has self-imposed limitation on his omniscience and omnipotence
God is everlasting in accordance to Swineburne
.Swinburne argues that a perfect being would not be immutable but changeable in order to have relationships with people and respond to them
-He proposes God is everlasting and has no beginning or end and is in time
How does Swinburne solve the problem of God’s omniscience and free will
.Swinburne defines omniscience as knowing everything that is logically possible to know
-God’s knowledge includes all future events that are predictable by physical laws but does not include free decisions made by humans
God’s Omnibenevolence
God’s love is understood as:
-An infinite love of all humans and is unconditional and personal to each person
God’s Love and Goodness in the Old Testament
“God saw everything that He made and it was good”
Problems raised by God’s omnibenevolence
Logical problem of evil
Evidential problem of evil
Why would a loving God send people to Hell
Hod does God show His love
God shows his love by setting humans heavy responsibility and a demand to follow his standards. Therefore God’s goodness is shown though His justice, judgment and forgiveness
The Prophet Hosea
God asks Hosea to marry a woman named Gomer who is known to be adulterous. Gomer cheats on Hosea many times yet he still takes her back. Symbolises God and Us.
The angry vengeful God
Portrayed in the story of Abraham and Isaac. Where in Genesis God commands Abraham to take his only son Isaac to a hilltop and sacrifice him there
Dawkins on God’s goodness
.Dawkins Argus that putting Abraham and Isaac through an awful ordeal to test Abraham is simply to satisfy His curiosity and not a demonstration of love
-“God is being obnoxious”
How do Christians defend God’s actions
Christians such as Tim Keller view this passage of Abraham as a foreshadowing of Jesus’ own sacrifice on that very mountain
Difficult Passage 2 on God’s omnibenevolence
The Amalekite Genocide
In defence of God being omnibenevolent
.Aquinas argues that we must remember that although God’s love is in some respects like humans love, God is infinitely greater than us therefore we only understand a proportion of God’s love
-Moltmann believes God does not let us suffer alone. God send Christ to Earth and suffered with us so God is with us in our pain.