7191556
Descripción
Fichas por Nicole Dane, actualizado hace más de 1 año
|
|
Creado por Nicole Dane
hace casi 8 años
|
|
| Pregunta | Respuesta |
| Belief in God: The Ontological Argument | - The ontological argument has to do with the nature of being. - The very idea of their being a supreme being, is in itself proof that a supreme being (God) does exist. - A property contained in a supreme being is that it must exist and exist eternally. - It is in the nature of that than which nothing greater can be thought that it exists (necessarily). There is a thing greater than anything else imaginable. |
| St. Anselm's Belief in god: The Ontological Argument Premises | P1. God is ‘that than which nothing greater can be thought’ (‘ttwngcbt’). - We know that somethings are better than others, and we know that God is the best thing that humans can imagine. P2. Ttwngcbt exists in one’s understanding. - God exists in our mind. P3. Ttwngcbt cannot exist only in the understanding, because then something greater than it would exist, ie that which also exists in reality. - Imagine there is something that exists only in the understanding, and it is the most amazing thing anyone can understand. - But, imagine such a thing actually exists, then it would be EVEN greater than just imaging the most amazing thing. - If the thing doesn’t exist, we could imagine it even greater in our mind, but we do not. The thing does exist, which makes the thing the best thing imaginable. C. God exists (in reality). |
| Belief in God: The Ontological Argument (Opposition) | - A fool does not believe in God, and according to this argument, we all seem to believe God exists. St Anselm’s reply to the fool: The fool doesn’t really understand God. (There are two ways to say something in one’s heart.) - The fool is just talking, just putting up a challenge. They do not truly understand God, because if they did the conclusion he exists would be inescapable. - Cats is a four lettered word. I refer to the word. Cats are aloof. I refer to the thing in the world. (God is interchangeable for cats. God is a three lettered word. The fool refers to the word. God is the most amazing thing to exist. St. Anselm refers to the thing in the world). - Aquinas's Reply: Someone who hears the word “God”, does not necessarily attach it to this. Not all people see/think of God this way. Even when people can attach the ideas to God, it does not mean God must exist outside of our minds. |
| Aquinas's Belief in God: The Cosmological Argument | 1. From facts about motion (or change). 2. From facts about causation - Every event/action is caused by something prior, chain of events that must start somewhere. The beginning of the chain must be god. 3. From facts about possibility and necessity. - There’s lots of things that don’t need to exist. The world would still be our world without these unnecessary things. There must be something that necessarily exists. That is god. 4. From the gradation to be found in things - There must be things better than other things (i.e. God). 5. From facts about the governance of the world. - The world is such that things are directed in certain ways, things are led in certain ways, but that could only be if something was in charge of the whole thing. |
| Belief in God: The Cosmological Argument (Opposition) | Russell's Reply to the 2nd Way: - ‘If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God.’ - The strength of the argument is that you get some type of God, you would have to practice some form of religion to gain more than simply the existence of a higher power. |
| Pascal's Belief in God: Pascal's Wager | 1. ‘If there is a God, He is infinitely incomprehensible’; ‘Reason can decide nothing here’. - God is incomprehensible, which means there is no reasonable way to prove the existence of God. 2. ‘…you must wager. It is not optional.’ - You are not really deducing whether God exists or not, you are picking a side (God exists vs. God does not exist). 3. ‘If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.’ - God does not exist, but you believe in him, you lose nothing. God does exist, and you believe in him, you go to heaven. - God does not exist, and you do not believe in him, you lose nothing. God does exist, but you do not believe in him, you go to hell. - By believing in God, you have everything to gain and nothing to lose. 4. ‘Wager, then, without hesitation, that He is.’ - Bet on God’s existence, because there is no losing when you do. |
| Belief in God: Pascal's Wager (Opposition) | - It could be optional to wager. - It is not nothing to spend your whole life believing something that turns out not to be true. Response: We make decisions without total certainty all of the time, so believing in God without total certainty is not unrealistic. |
| Belief in God: Pascal's Wager (Making oneself believe) | 1. ‘Endeavor…to convince yourself, not by increase of proofs of God, but by the abatement of your passions.’ - It is not searching for more arguments to believe in God, as an attempt to convince yourself. - It is denying yourself of your passions, which amount to sins. ‘Follow the way by which they began; by acting as if they believed, taking the holy water, having masses said, etc.’ - ACT like you believe. Do as believers do. - Eventually, the belief will come. - Becoming less reflective is a small price to pay for the benefits of believing. |
| Haley's Belief in God: The Argument From Design | - The only explanation for the watch is that someone made it/put it there. The inference is not undermined by: 1) The fact that one cannot make a watch. 2) The fact that the watch is sometimes wrong. (If it works or not) 3) The fact that one might not understand what each part of the watch does. - No matter any of these factors, the watch HAS to have been made/designed by someone (a human). And would only be strengthened if it turned out the watch was made by another watch. - The atheist is in the position of someone who picks up the watch, and says it was not made by someone, it simply appeared or was created by another watch. This is not very logical. |
| Belief in Knowledge: The Argument From Design (Opposition) | - It is not that someone said, ‘Its cold here, so I am going to put the things which can be cold, here.” No, there is no design, reason, or rhyme to the make up of the world. - Living things survive because they adapt to their conditions; If they are somewhere that is cold, they might grow thicker fur to cope with the cold. |
| Russell's Belief in God: Evolution by Natural Selection | 1. It’s simpler or at least ontologically more modest. - We assume less when considering evolution. - Paley would have us believe that the world is this amazing and perfect system, where everything works as it should. His explanation for this is the existence of God (far-fetched). 2. It’s more nuanced. - Design is unreasonable because there are things in the world which are designed poorly, and evolution can explain why such things are the way they are. - Evolution is more specific and particular, so it is able to explain things with greater detail and clarity. 3. It’s independently confirmed. - There is scientific explanations which can be investigated and confirmed by any individual willing. |
| Belief in God: Certainty | - The very fact that God is a supreme being, is the greatest thing we can imagine, proves his existence. If he is the greatest thing we can imagine, he must exist, otherwise we would imagine a greater thing than him. - God is unlike any other idea in any way, which is a good thing. This is because everything that we use to prove God’s existence, must also be true and real, giving us more truth. - When considering God’s nature, we find that he is great, supreme, and good in all aspects. This proves that these things must be true. They all must exist in some way. - The idea that God deceives us contradicts God’s nature of being truthful, good, and giving. - All deception comes from our own personal human error, which we have already acknowledged that we make constantly. - |
| Belief in God: Certainty (Doubt) | - The idea that God deceives us contradicts God’s nature of being truthful, good, and giving. - All deception comes from our own personal human error, which we have already acknowledged that we make constantly. So what is the cause of error? - The fact that “[t]he scope of the will is wider than that of the intellect.” Principles 1.35 So how can we be certain about anything? - - God is not a deceiver, he is good. God gives us the ability to clearly and distinctly perceive things in the world. This is how we can be certain of things in life. - When we perceive something clearly and distinctly, we can be certain of it. - Problematic: We have to clearly and distinctly perceive something which we clearly and distinctly perceive (circular). - One proof of God is that he exists because we clearly and distinctly perceive him. |
¿Quieres crear tus propias Fichas gratiscon GoConqr? Más información.