por Flashcards
Aquinas
“logically possible” –> to evade Paradoxes
–> Just because God chooses not to do something does not mean he is guilty
Morris
“what is logically possible for a perfect being to do, God can do”.
It also solves problems regarding God being “limited” by his other attributes such as benevolence.
Criticisms of Morris
What is logically possible for humans might not be logically possible for God –> Transcendance
Also, the definition separates God’s benevolence and omnipotence, which is problematic because of God’s simplicity.
Counters to Morris
But, the simplicity is not a problem, because Morris is still describing one body of existence that is God.
- By consequence, this argues that benevolence and omnipotence are the same, which is fallacious.
Problem of K regarding Morris
how can we ascribe God physical properties
Also big problem with the definition –> How can God be logically perfect by definition
-This is an analytic statement, which Kant would argue is meaningless. It is also a circular argument, as it relies on God’s perfection to justify an attribute of God that makes him perfect.
What does Boethius define eternity as
“timeless” and not “everlasting”
What is the implication of Boethius’s def
God experiences all of time at once
Compatible with Free WIll –> sees them happening simultaneously
What does Boethius mean by Simple and Conditional Necessity
Simple Necessity –> something must happen because of its nature
Conditional Necessity –> that if a certain condition occurs then something must happen as an outcome
How does Boethius’ view of Necessity allow for
God’s knowledge doesn’t entail necessity and “God sees all things that are the result of human free will”: these things are therefore necessary on the condition that they are known by God.
But, when considered only in themselves, they are free in their own natures.
God’s omnipotence has allowed him to create a world of presentism that seems logically impossible but in reality solves the paradox of omniscience.
Boethius observes all time and has knowledge of it, but this doesn’t mean that he affects the course of action
Criticisms of Boethius
Evaluation of the Teleological Argument
(Darwinian Exhbition)
- However, Darwinian evolution attacks the premise that our designed world shows evidence of the Judeo-Christian God, who is supposedly benevolent. In a world of natural selection, everything is “survival of the fittest” and therefore “death of the weakest”.
There is evidence for mass extinctions that have come about. Also, evidence in the laryngeal nerve for example shows that humans are just a very well-developed animal. This means there is nothing special about humans, contrary to Christian Imago Dei.
But, Paley admits that the design may not be prefect, but it must still be designed, because to say that the world is definitely not designed implies that it should work some other way.
Criticism of the Teleological Argument:-What is the universe is self-causing, just as a watch could be self-reproducing?
For Paley, this simply makes the design even greater, because it evidences the design of the watch is even greater than we first thought.
This is because a designer can set a mechanism in place such that the watch can replicate itself, just as God can design the world to appear to be self-sustainable.
Theists might respond by arguing that humans can never judge whether the universe is truly evil or not. It follows that what is important is not the nature of God’s purpose but its existence.
-However, this rebuttal is flawed because of how it ignores the definition of “God” that it is proving. Arguments for the existence of God must prove a God that is consistent with his attributes and therefore the nature of God’s design is important.
Differences between the Evidential and Logical Arguments
Logical –> Inconsistent Triad
Evidential
–> Existence of Evil THAT IS INEXPLICABLE
–> In that it they could have been prevented without thereby losing some greater good
More Inductive argument
However, if true, undermines the existence of God, not one or two attributes. There is also more attention to moral evil.
William Alston Ordinary Language
Freud
Freud argues that all mental actions can be understood as a response between rational areas of the mind and its repressed inner desires and experiences. This is the conflict between the Id and the super-ego. Religious belief is no different, and, if it can be best understood from the analysis of one’s mental actions, then there shouldn’t be a need to refer to a divine being for its generation or course. Human beings have had to contend with the effects of the unpredictable forces of nature, which produces anxiety as humans find it difficult to deal with parts of the world that are inherently meaningless to them and that they are powerless to control. Religious belief, then, arises as a psychological response to this anxiety, causing the desire to understand and regulate the dangers of the natural world.
