Possible Exam Questions Plans Flashcards
To what extent does Plato’s view of the forms explain reality?
Introduction - Describe Plato’s theory of the forms
Describe Plato’s theory of reality
Mini conclusion that Plato’s view of the forms does not explain reality
Paragraph 1 - The one over many argument
COUNTER
Wittgenstein’s family resemblance theory
Paragraph 2 - John Locke and Bertrand Russell – not logical to say there is a world we cannot see
Paragraph 3 - Why shouldn’t we trust our senses?
Paragraph 4 - Plato lacks clarity – ideal of cancer?
Paragraph 5 - Logical positivists – no such values as ‘beauty’ as it is subjective
Conclusion - Infinite regression/third man
Conclude that to no extent does it explain reality
Evaluate Plato’s view on the hierarchy of the forms, including the form of the good
Introduction - Describe Plato’s theory of the forms
Describe Plato’s form of the good, linking to the analogy
Mini conclusion that Plato’s view on the hierarchy of the forms is weak and unsubstantiated
Paragraph 1 - Form of good strong, links to religion and analogy
Easy way to understand it
Paragraph 2 - Bryan Magee – encourages people to seek enlightenment
Paragraph 3 - Plato lacks clarity – ideal of cancer
Paragraph 4 - The material world changes, the world of forms doesn’t – has there always been a form of the iPad?
Paragraph 5 - Logical positivists – no such values as the forms say as they are subjective
Conclusion - Infinite regression/third man
Conclude that the theory of the forms is weak and flawed
Critically Discuss Plato’s Theory of Reality
Introduction - Describe Plato’s theory of reality
Mini conclusion that Plato’s theory of reality is weak and unsubstantiated
Paragraph 1 - The one over many argument
COUNTER
Wittgenstein’s family resemblance theory
Paragraph 2 - John Locke and Bertrand Russell – not logical to say there is a world we cannot see
Paragraph 3 - Why shouldn’t we trust our senses?
Paragraph 4 - Plato lacks clarity – ideal of cancer?
Paragraph 5 - Logical positivists – no such values as ‘beauty’ as it is subjective
Conclusion - Infinite regression/third man
Conclude that to no extent does it explain reality
Assess the effectiveness of Plato’s theory of the forms in explaining the world
Introduction - Describe Plato’s theory of the forms
Describe Plato’s theory of reality
Describe how Plato explains his ideas (analogy)
Mini conclusion that Plato explains the wrong thing but very effectively
Paragraph 1 - John Locke and Bertrand Russell – not logical to say there is a world we cannot see
Paragraph 2 - Why shouldn’t we trust our senses?
Paragraph 3 - Plato lacks clarity – ideal of cancer?
Paragraph 4 - Logical positivists – no such values as ‘beauty’ as it is subjective
Paragraph 5 - Infinite regression/third man
Conclusion - The analogy of the cave explains a difficult concept in a way that’s easier to understand
Conclude that Plato explains the wrong thing but very effectively through his analogy
‘Conversion experiences are the most convincing form of religious experience.’ Discuss
Introduction - Describe what a religious experience is
Describe what a conversion experience is
Conclude they are the most convincing form of religious experience, but that is still not very
Paragraph 1 - Davey Falcus, massive change in his life
Paragraph 2 - Davey Falcus, points against him
Paragraph 3 - St Paul, road to Damascus
Paragraph 4 - V.S. Ramachandran, temporal lobe epilepsy
Paragraph 5 - Corporate religious experience, happen to large crowds, all give same testimony
COUNTER
Crowd psychology, being in a group suscepts us to unusual behaviors – its all psychological
Conclusion - Sigmond Freud, conversion syndrome
Conclude that they are the most convincing, but are still not that convincing overall
How satisfactory are religious experiences as proof of the existence of God?
Introduction - Describe what a religious experience is and how they could be used as proof of God
Conclude that they aren’t as there are much more rational explanations for them
Paragraph 1 - William James, they happen to ‘normal’ people and have a profound effect, Davey Falcus
COUNTER
Evaluate the credulity of Falcus’ claim
Paragraph 2 - Corporate religious experience, happen to large crowds, all give same testimony
COUNTER
Crowd psychology, being in a group suscepts us to unusual behaviors – its all psychological
Paragraph 3 - Sigmund Freud, conversion syndrome, wish fulfillment, mental illness
Paragraph 4 - Michael Persinger, machine that induces religious experiences, temporal lobe epilepsy
Paragraph 5 - V.S. Ramachandran, temporal lobe epilepsy, for example Ellen White
Conclusion - Religious experiences are subjective, we cannot take one persons experience as proof
Conclude that they are not satisfactory as proof of the existence of God
‘Religious experiences are weak evidence for God because they happen to individuals not groups.’ Discuss
Introduction - Describe what a religious experience is and how they could be used as evidence for God
Conclude that all religious experiences, group or individual, are weak evidence
Paragraph 1 - William James, they happen to ‘normal’ people and have a profound effect, Davey Falcus
COUNTER
Evaluate the credulity of Falcus’ claim
Paragraph 2 - Corporate religious experience, happen to large crowds, all give same testimony
COUNTER
Crowd psychology, being in a group suscepts us to unusual behaviors – its all psychological
Paragraph 3 - Freud, conversion syndrome, wish fulfillment, mental illness
Paragraph 4 - Michael Persinger, machine that induces religious experiences, temporal lobe epilepsy
Paragraph 5 - V.S. Ramachandran, temporal lobe epilepsy, for example Ellen White
Conclusion - Religious experiences are subjective, we cannot take one persons experience as proof
Conclude they are weak evidence, not because they are individual, as groups also weak
‘Religious Experience provide a solid basis for belief in God or a higher power’ Discuss
Introduction - Describe what a religious experience is and how they could be used as basis for belief
Conclude that they don’t as there are much more rational explanations for them
Paragraph 1 - William James, they happen to ‘normal’ people and have a profound effect, Davey Falcus
COUNTER
Evaluate the credulity of Falcus’ claim
Paragraph 2 - Corporate religious experience, happen to large crowds, all give same testimony
COUNTER
Crowd psychology, being in a group suscepts us to unusual behaviors – its all psychological
Paragraph 3 - Freud, conversion syndrome, wish fulfillment, mental illness
Paragraph 4 - Michael Persinger, machine that induces religious experiences, temporal lobe epilepsy
Paragraph 5 - V.S. Ramachandran, temporal lobe epilepsy, for example Ellen White
Conclusion - Religious experiences are subjective, we cannot take one persons experience as proof
Conclude that they are do not provide a solid bases for belief in God or a higher power
‘Religious Experience shows that we can be united with something greater than ourselves.’ Discuss
Introduction - Describe what a religious experience is
Describe how it could unite us with something greater than ourselves
Conclude that religious experience does not unite us with something greater than ourselves
Paragraph 1 - Rudolf Otto, the numinous
Paragraph 2 - John Calvin, Sensus divinitatus, we sense God and are united with something greater
Paragraph 3 - St Paul, road to Damascus
COUNTER
V.S. Ramachandran, temporal lobe epilepsy
Paragraph 4 - AJ Ayer, dysfunctional mind
Paragraph 5 - Corporate religious experience, happen to large crowds, all give same testimony
COUNTER
Crowd psychology, being in a group suscepts us to unusual behaviors – its all psychological
Conclusion - Michael Persinger, machine that induces religious experiences, temporal lobe epilepsy
Conclude that religious experiences are likely untrue and so cannot unite us
‘Conversion experiences do not provide a basis for belief in God.’ Discuss
Introduction - Describe what a religious experience is
Describe what a conversion experience is
Conclude they do not provide a basis for belief in God
Paragraph 1 - Davey Falcus, massive change in his life
Paragraph 2 - Davey Falcus, points against him
Paragraph 3 - St Paul, road to Damascus
Paragraph 4 - V.S. Ramachandran, temporal lobe epilepsy
Paragraph 5 - William James, they happen to ‘normal’ people and have a profound effect
Conclusion - Sigmond Freud, conversion syndrome
Conclude that they are the most convincing, but are still not that convincing overall
‘Corporate religious experiences are less reliable than individual religious experiences.’ Discuss
Introduction - Describe what a religious experience is and the difference between corporate and individual
Conclude that all religious experiences are unreliable, but corporate even more so
Paragraph 1 - William James, they happen to ‘normal’ people and have a profound effect, Davey Falcus
COUNTER
Evaluate the credulity of Falcus’ claim
Paragraph 2 - Corporate religious experience, happen to large crowds, all give same testimony
COUNTER
Crowd psychology, being in a group suscepts us to unusual behaviors – its all psychological
Paragraph 3 - Freud, conversion syndrome, wish fulfillment, mental illness
Paragraph 4 - Michael Persinger, machine that induces religious experiences, temporal lobe epilepsy
Paragraph 5 - V.S. Ramachandran, temporal lobe epilepsy, for example Ellen White
Conclusion - Swinburne, principle of credulity, shows individual to be more reliable
Conclude less reliable than individual, but religious experiences as a whole are unreliable
‘Conversion are not genuine examples of religious experience.’ Discuss
Introduction - Describe what a religious experience is and what a conversion is
Conclude conversions not examples religious experiences, religious experiences not real
Paragraph 1 - Davey Falcus, massive change in his life
Paragraph 2 - Davey Falcus, points against him
Paragraph 3 - St Paul, road to Damascus
Paragraph 4 - V.S. Ramachandran, temporal lobe epilepsy
Paragraph 5 - AJ Ayer, dysfunctional mind
Conclusion - Sigmond Freud, conversion syndrome
Conclude conversion experiences not genuine as religious experiences explained other ways
Assess the claim that natural evil has a purpose.
Introduction - Describe what natural evil is
Describe how this links to the problem of evil in terms of logical and evidential (examples)
Conclude that natural evil has no purpose
Paragraph 1 - John Hick – our response helps us grow spiritually into the likeness of God (free will)
Paragraph 2 - Gil Edwards – qualities like courage and trust can only come through suffering
Paragraph 3 - Richard Swinburne – God is like a parent, tough love helping us to mature
Paragraph 4 - The extent and severity of suffering – why 6 million Jews dying instead of 4 million?
Paragraph 5 - Challenges don’t always result in human growth – holocaust brough misery and suffering
Conclusion - Surely there are other ways for humans to develop, instead of evil
Conclude that natural evil has no purpose
Critically discuss the theodicy of Augustine.
Introduction - Describe in brief the theodicy of Augustine
Describe how Augustine’s theodicy challenges both logical and evidential evil
Conclude that the theodicy of Augustine is an ineffective solution to the problem of evil
Paragraph 1 - Brian Davies – agrees with Augustine’s idea of evil being a privation
Paragraph 2 - Science – Augustine believes we went from perfect to bad, evolution says were getting better
Paragraph 3 - Moral – how is it fair that we are punished for a crime committed by someone else?
Paragraph 4 - Moral – if God is omniscient and knew evil would come from the world, why did he create it?
Paragraph 5 - Science – the story of Adam and Eve is a myth, how can Augustine base his theodicy on it?
Conclusion - Friedrich Schleiermacher – logical error, how can a perfect world go wrong?
Conclude that the theodicy of Augustine is an ineffective solution to the problem of evil
Critically compare the logical and evidential aspects of the problem of evil as challenges to belief.
Introduction - Describe the logical and evidential aspects of the problem of evil as challenges to belief
Conclude that the evidential aspects of the problem of evil pose a larger challenge to belief
Paragraph 1 - Describe the logical problem of evil through John Mackie’s inconsistent triad
COUNTER
Fails to consider that Evil may be necessary in some way
Paragraph 2 - If God is omniscient and knew evil would come from the world, why did he create it?
COUNTER
John Hicks vale of soul making as an explanation for logical
Paragraph 3 - Challenges don’t always result in human growth, holocaust, Hick doesn’t solve evidential
Paragraph 4 - Augustine’s fall as an explanation for logical and evidential
COUNTER
Cruel to be punished for a sin not committed by us
Conclusion - The extent and severity of suffering – why 6 million Jews dying instead of 4 million?
Conclude that the evidential aspects of the problem of evil pose a larger challenge to belief
‘Augustine’s interpretation of the fall successfully explains the problem of evil’ Discuss.
Introduction - Describe in brief Augustine’s interpretation of the fall and resulting theodicy
Describe how Augustine’s theodicy challenges both logical and evidential evil
Conclude that Augustine’s interpretation of the fall does not successfully explain the PoE
Paragraph 1 - Brian Davies – agrees with Augustine’s idea of evil being a privation
Paragraph 2 - Science – Augustine believes we went from perfect to bad, evolution says opposite
Paragraph 3 - Moral – how is it fair that we are punished for a crime committed by someone else?
Paragraph 4 - Moral – if God is omniscient and knew evil would come from the world, why did he create it?
Paragraph 5 - Science – the story of Adam and Eve is a myth, how can Augustine base his theodicy on it?
Conclusion - Friedrich Schleiermacher – logical error, how can a perfect world go wrong?
Conclude that Augustine’s interpretation of the fall does not successfully explain the PoE
Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of Augustine’s theodicy.
Introduction - Describe Augustine’s theodicy
Describe how Augustine’s theodicy challenges both logical and evidential evil
Conclude that Augustine’s theodicy not successfully solve the PoE
Paragraph 1 - Brian Davies – agrees with Augustine’s idea of evil being a privation
Paragraph 2 - Science – Augustine believes we went from perfect to bad, evolution says opposite
Paragraph 3 - Moral – how is it fair that we are punished for a crime committed by someone else?
Paragraph 4 - Moral – if God is omniscient and knew evil would come from the world, why did he create it?
Paragraph 5 - Science – the story of Adam and Eve is a myth, how can Augustine base his theodicy on it?
Conclusion - Friedrich Schleiermacher – logical error, how can a perfect world go wrong?
Conclude that Augustine’s theodicy not successfully solve the PoE
Can Augustine’s view of the origins of moral and natural evils spare God from blame for evils in the world?
Introduction - Describe Augustine’s theodicy
Describe how Augustine’s theodicy challenges both logical and evidential evil
Conclude that Augustine’s theodicy does not spare God from blame for evils in the world
Paragraph 1 - Brian Davies – agrees with Augustine’s idea of evil being a privation
Paragraph 2 - Science – Augustine believes we went from perfect to bad, evolution says opposite
Paragraph 3 - Moral – how is it fair that we are punished for a crime committed by someone else?
Paragraph 4 - Friedrich Schleiermacher – logical error, how can a perfect world go wrong?
Paragraph 5 - Science – the story of Adam and Eve is a myth, how can Augustine base his theodicy on it?
Conclusion - Moral – if God is omniscient and knew evil would come from the world, why did he create it?
Conclude that Augustine’s theodicy does not spare God from blame for evils in the world
Can the ‘vale of soul-making’ theodicy justify the existence or extent of evils?
Introduction - Describe Hick’s vale of soul making theodicy
Conclude his ‘vale of soul-making’ theodicy does not justify the existence or extent of evils
Paragraph 1 - Gil Edwards – qualities like courage and trust can only come through suffering
Paragraph 2 - DZ Phillips – allowing suffering can never be regarded as loving
Paragraph 3 - Richard Swinburne – God is like a parent, tough love helping us to mature
Paragraph 4 - The extent and severity of suffering – why 6 million Jews dying instead of 4 million?
Paragraph 5 - Challenges don’t always result in human growth – holocaust brough misery and suffering
Conclusion - Surely there are other ways for humans to develop, instead of evil
Conclude that natural evil has no purpose
Assess the view that the Bible is a comprehensive moral guide for Christians.
Introduction - Describe what the Bible is
Describe what makes a comprehensive moral guide for Christians
Conclude that the Bible is not a comprehensive moral guide for Christians
Paragraph 1 - Bible is dictated by God and as a result infallible
Paragraph 2 - Bible contains a rich source of moral commandments such as the ten commandments
Paragraph 3 - Contradictions within Bible, Exodus 20:13 against Exodus 32:27
Paragraph 4 - Karl Barth – Bibliolatry, bible not to be worshiped as the truth, just a witness to the truth
Paragraph 5 - Bible contains the direct teachings of Jesus, son of God, teachings should be followed
Conclusion - Joseph Fletcher – sola scriptura too rigid, use of agape, Jesus as example
Conclude that the Bible is not a comprehensive moral guide for Christians
‘Christian Ethics are distinctive’ Discuss.
Introduction - Describe what Christian Ethics are
Describe what it means for something to be distinctive
Conclude that Christian ethics are not distinctive
Paragraph 1 - Augustine – human reason is corrupt (the fall) and we need the Bible for revelation
Paragraph 2 - Catholic Church – faith ethic, Christian ethics cannot be discovered by unaided reason
Paragraph 3 - Fundamentalists – Sola Scriptura shows that as Bible is the word of God it is distinctive
Paragraph 4 - Bentham – ethics overall should not be Christian based, all governed by two masters (P+P)
Paragraph 5 - Aquinas – natural law is a universal recognition of morality
Conclusion - Joseph Fletcher – ‘love is the only universal’
Conclude that Christian ethics are not distinctive
‘Christian Ethics are personal’ Discuss.
Introduction - Describe what Christian Ethics are
Describe what it means for something to be personal
Conclude that Christian ethics are personal
Paragraph 1 - Catholics – must be part of community so can see tradition and wisdom of community
Paragraph 2 - Anglican Church – interpretations have changed over time with different communities
Paragraph 3 - Jesus spoke to groups, such as the sermon on the mount – Hauerwas
COUNTER
Jesus spoke to individual circumstances e.g. the woman with the bleeding
Paragraph 4 - The community focus is worship and prayer, rather than ethics – that is up to the individual
Paragraph 5 - Biblicist – everyone interprets biblical stories in their own way
Conclusion - Joseph Fletcher – personalism, everyone’s circumstances are so different
Conclude that Christian ethics are personal
Is the principle of love sufficient to live a good life?
Introduction - Describe the principle of love
Describe how this relates to morality (autonomous ethics)
Conclude that love is sufficient to live a good life
Paragraph 1 - Flexible and as a result practical – not constrained by absolutes
Paragraph 2 - Highly impractical and provides, wrongly, justification for breaking religious and civil laws
Paragraph 3 - The end will always justify the means, as the most loving outcome will always appear
Paragraph 4 - Catholics believe we need revelation from God to live a good life
Paragraph 5 - Responds to cultural change – Fletcher aware the approach benefits modern people
Conclusion - Fletcher – Jesus applied it, prevented a women from being stoned to death after adultery
Conclude that love is sufficient to live a good life
‘The most important source for Christian ethics is Church teaching.’ Discuss.
Introduction - Describe this type of approach and who follows it
Conclude that it is not the most important source of Christian ethics
Paragraph 1 - Papal infallibility, apostolic succession
COUNTER
Removes authority from God
Paragraph 2 - Unifies Christians as there is a core set of beliefs
Paragraph 3 - Corruption in the Catholic Church, this suggests that its apostolic tradition is flawed
Paragraph 4 - It allows Christians to gain further advice on issues that are not covered by the Bible e.g. IVF
Conclusion - Joseph Fletcher – autonomous ethics provides flexibility and personalism
Conclude that Church teaching is not the most important source of Christian ethics
To what extent does Aquinas’ cosmological argument successfully reach the conclusion that there is a transcendent creator?
Introduction - Describe Aquinas’ cosmological argument
Describe what is meant by transcendent creator
Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument does not successfully reach the conclusion that there is a transcendent creator
Paragraph 1 - Swinburne – strong inductive, uses Ockham’s razor
Paragraph 2 - ‘a posteriori’ – based on empirical evidence, everyone has experience of cause and effect
Paragraph 3 Science – the universe is either eternal or cause of a spontaneous random event
Paragraph 4 Contradiction – Aquinas says God is infinite yet infinity is impossible
Paragraph 5 Kierkegaard – Paradox not contradiction, it makes sense but we don’t understand God so can’t understand it
Conclusion Russell – Fallacy of composition
Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument does not successfully reach the conclusion that there is a transcendent creator
To what extent does Hume successfully argue that observation does not prove the existence of God?
Introduction Describe the two arguments for God which are based on observation (teleo and cosmo)
State that Hume believes that neither of these prove the existence of God
Conclude Hume successfully argues that observation does not prove the existence of God
Paragraph 1 Cosmological – empirical evidence, everyone has experience of cause and effect
HOWEVER, doesn’t prove the existence of God, just need of a first cause
Paragraph 2 Teleological – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world
HOWEVER, doesn’t prove the existence of God, just need of a designer
Paragraph 3 Hume – order does not prove design
Paragraph 4 Hume – why prove God? Why couldn’t there be more than one God?
Paragraph 5 Hume – why the Christian God? It could prove the Hindu’s are right
Conclusion Hume – cannot see the first cause or design, and cannot go outside universe to establish relationship between itself and its cause
Conclude Hume successfully argues that observation does not prove the existence of God
‘Aquinas’ fifth way does not demonstrate the existence of God’ Discuss.
Introduction Describe Aquinas’ fifth way (teleo)
Conclude that Aquinas’ fifth way does not demonstrate the existence of God
Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world
Paragraph 2 Hume – order does not prove design
Paragraph 3 Hume – why prove God? Why couldn’t there be more than one God?
Paragraph 4 Hume – why the Christian God? It could prove the Hindu’s are right
Paragraph 5 Science – evolution (Dawkins)
COUNTER
Science and religion are compatible (Darwin quote)
Conclusion Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer or they were cruel
Conclude that Aquinas’ fifth way does not demonstrate the existence of God
To what extent does Kant successfully criticize the ontological argument?
Introduction Describe the ontological argument
Conclude that Kant does successfully criticize the ontological argument
Paragraph 1 ‘a priori’ – deductive and reaches a logical conclusion
Paragraph 2 Kant – existence is not a predicate and so the ontological argument is based on a mistake
Paragraph 3 Descartes – the term ‘perfect’ includes within it the notion of existence
Paragraph 4 Stephen Davis – Kant is not able to prove conclusively that ‘exists’ is not a real predicate
Conclusion Kant – the triangle argument (can’t reject 3 sides but can reject whole triangle)
Conclude that Kant does successfully criticize the ontological argument
‘The world was created by chance, not by God’s design’ Discuss.
Introduction Describe the design argument (teleo)
Conclude that the world was created by God’s design, not by chance
Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world
Paragraph 2 Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer
Paragraph 3 Problem of evil – John Hick’s vale of soul making, God designed it with evil in mind
Paragraph 4 Hume – no one was there to witness the event of design
Paragraph 5 Science – evolution (Dawkins)
Conclusion Science and religion are compatible (Darwin quote)
Conclude that the world was created by God’s design, not be chance
Evaluate Aquinas’ cosmological argument for God’s existence
Introduction Describe Aquinas’ cosmological argument
Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument is weak when used to prove God’s existence
Paragraph 1 Swinburne – strong inductive, uses Ockham’s razor
Paragraph 2 ‘a posteriori’ – based on empirical evidence, everyone has experience of cause and effect
Paragraph 3 Science – the universe is either eternal or cause of a spontaneous random event
Paragraph 4 Contradiction – Aquinas says God is infinite yet infinity is impossible
Paragraph 5 Kierkegaard – Paradox not contradiction, it makes sense but we don’t understand God so can’t understand it
Conclusion Russell – Fallacy of composition
Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument is weak when used to prove God’s existence
‘Paley’s teleological argument successfully defends the existence of God’ Discuss.
Introduction Describe Paley’s teleological argument
Conclude that Paley’s teleological argument doesn’t successfully defend existence of God
Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world
Paragraph 2 Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer
Paragraph 3 Problem of evil – John Hick’s vale of soul making, God designed it with evil in mind
Paragraph 4 Hume – weak analogy (Paley’s watch)
Paragraph 5 Science – evolution (Dawkins)
Conclusion Hume – no one was there to witness the event of design
Conclude that Paley’s teleological argument doesn’t successfully defend existence of God
‘There is no design in the universe’ Discuss.
Introduction Describe the design argument (teleo)
Conclude that there is design in the universe
Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world
Paragraph 2 Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer
Paragraph 3 Problem of evil – John Hick’s vale of soul making, God designed it with evil in mind
Paragraph 4 Hume – no one was there to witness the event of design
Paragraph 5 Science – evolution (Dawkins)
Conclusion Science and religion are compatible (Darwin quote)
Conclude that there is design in the universe
To what extent is Aquinas’ cosmological argument successful in proving that God exists?
Introduction Describe Aquinas’ cosmological argument
Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument is unsuccessful in proving that God exists
Paragraph 1 Swinburne – strong inductive, uses Ockham’s razor
Paragraph 2 ‘a posteriori’ – based on empirical evidence, everyone has experience of cause and effect
Paragraph 3 Science – the universe is either eternal or cause of a spontaneous random event
Paragraph 4 Contradiction – Aquinas says God is infinite yet infinity is impossible
Paragraph 5 Kierkegaard – Paradox not contradiction, it makes sense but we don’t understand God so can’t understand it
Conclusion Russell – Fallacy of composition
Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument is unsuccessful in proving that God exists
‘The universe is just there: it neither has nor needs an explanation’ Discuss.
Introduction Describe the two arguments for the universe which give an explanation (teleo and cosmo)
Conclude the universe is just there: it neither has nor needs an explanation
Paragraph 1 Swinburne (cosmological) – strong inductive, uses Ockham’s razor
Paragraph 2 ‘a posteriori’ (both) – based on empirical evidence, everyone’s experienced the precepts
Paragraph 3 Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer
Paragraph 4 Problem of evil – John Hick’s vale of soul making, God designed it with evil in mind
Paragraph 5 Hume – even if universe did begin, doesn’t mean anything caused it to come into existence
Conclusion Hume – order does not prove design
Conclude the universe is just there: it neither has nor needs an explanation
To what extent does St. Anselm’s ontological argument prove the necessary existence of God?
Introduction Describe the ontological argument put forward by St Anselm
Conclude St. Anselm’s ontological argument doesn’t prove the necessary existence of God
Paragraph 1 ‘a priori’ – deductive and reaches a logical conclusion
Paragraph 2 Kant – existence is not a predicate and so the ontological argument is based on a mistake
Paragraph 3 Descartes – the term ‘perfect’ includes within it the notion of existence
Paragraph 4 Stephen Davis – Kant is not able to prove conclusively that ‘exists’ is not a real predicate
Paragraph 5 Kant – the triangle argument (can’t reject 3 sides but can reject whole triangle)
Conclusion Aquinas – to define something we have to understand it, we don’t understand God
Conclude St. Anselm’s ontological argument doesn’t prove the necessary existence of God
‘We cannot derive the existence of God from his definition’ Discuss.
Introduction Describe the ontological argument
Conclude we can’t derive the existence of God from his definition
Paragraph 1 ‘a priori’ – deductive and reaches a logical conclusion
Paragraph 2 Kant – existence is not a predicate and so the ontological argument is based on a mistake
Paragraph 3 Descartes – the term ‘perfect’ includes within it the notion of existence
Paragraph 4 Stephen Davis – Kant is not able to prove conclusively that ‘exists’ is not a real predicate
Paragraph 5 Kant – the triangle argument (can’t reject 3 sides but can reject whole triangle)
Conclusion Aquinas – to define something we have to understand it, we don’t understand God
Conclude we can’t derive the existence of God from his definition
