Philosophy Flashcards Preview

From Flashcardlet > Philosophy > Flashcards

Flashcards in Philosophy Deck (258)
Loading flashcards...
0
Q

What does Hume say about psychology and religion?

A

Hick argues that the verdict that religion can be explained away by psychology is ‘not proven’. While Freud and Jung offered valuable insights into the mechanisms that lead to religious belief, there is nothing compelling in either account to lead us to conclude that religion is a construct of mental activity.

1
Q

How did Professor Richard Dawkins challenge all religious accounts of creation?

A

Evolution is not a faith position. Like the ‘theory’ the earth is round and not flat, evolution is supported by mountains of scientific evidence, accepted by informed scientists and church people from the pope on.

2
Q

How did Karl Marx view religion?

A

dehumanising
disempowering
authoritarian
stifling free social self-expression
Marx saw true human nature as being both self-conscious and self-deterministic. This true character is frustrated by both capitalism and religion. Religion replaces this determinism with empty meaningless imagery, devoid of dignity.

3
Q

What are the major questions that philosophy, religion and science tries to answer?

A

How we got here, and why we are here.

4
Q

How did Freud link primal hordes to religion?

A

The totem becomes a way of controlling guilt. This stage of the process is called animism. Freud then traced the process through to its second stage which he called religious, in which the reputation of the slaughtered father grows to divine proportions, through the ambivalence and respect remain. To illustrate this, Freud referred to the Catholic celebration of the eucharist – the mass. In the mass, the slaughter of the God is recreated, and the representatives of the original horde eat the symbolic body. In this way, the guilt feelings are dealt with.

5
Q

What do Creationists believe?

A

That the bible gives a factual account of God’s creation of the world in six days.

6
Q

What does Freud say religion originates from?

A

the ritualistic nature of religious activity is a compulsive obsessive neurosis – this he called the “universal obsessional neurosis”. Freud argued that religion arises from a fear of a chaotic an unordered world (The Future of an Illusion, 1927). A person’s resolution of this traumatic perception of the world is to project on to it their memory of their father, who provided a world of order and regularity while they were a child.

7
Q

What does Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) say about religion?

A

Durkheim attempted to demonstrate that religious phenomena stemmed from social rather than divine factors He came to define religion in terms of its function within society. He saw it as a means of social cohesion. In The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (1912), Durkheim noted that religion is an important part of the stability and integration in a society. These beliefs and practices unite people into a single moral community e.g. the church. Durkheim suggests that by worshipping god, people are in fact worshipping society. It is easier to visualise and direct feelings towards a symbol or totem rather than a complex concept as society itself.

8
Q

What did Stephan Hawking say about the Big Bang Theory in reference to religion?

A

An expanding universe does not preclude a creator, but it does place limits on when he might have carried out his job.

9
Q

What do other theologians believe about genesis?

A

They think creation is an ongoing process in which God plays a part. But they don’t view the Genesis story as a literal account, but rather a story designed to help people understand their relationship with God and the natural world.

10
Q

What is the difference in approach between religion and science?

A

Religion asks why and science asks how.

11
Q

How did Darwin’s discovery challenge religious beliefs?

A

Challenged the view of God as the creator of animals, and of humans to be like himself.
Natural selection conflicts with the account in Genesis that every being was created for a specific purpose.
It is a cruel process, so leaves no space for a God who is concerned about the welfare or suffering of his creations.

12
Q

Criticism of Freud’s ideas?

A

Religion has beneficial uses
Freud’s idea would only work if guilt could be passed down generationally. The ambivalence and guilt that lead to religious activity would need to be present in every generation. Even if the primal crime of patricide actually happened, guilt for the act cannot be passed on
It was also pointed out that Freud’s argument that religion arises out of the worship of a father figure neglects to consider the religions in which the point of worship is a woman, or the religious systems that have no deity at all.

13
Q

What is the big bang theory?

A

the theory that the universe originated sometime between 10 billion and 20 billion years ago from the cataclysmic explosion of a small volume of matter at extremely high density and temperature

14
Q

What did Carl Gustav Jung think religion was caused by?

A

Jung argued that God is an archetype. Each of us is born with the tendency to generate religious images. We share in these archetypes through the collective unconscious. Individuals participate in their cultural heritage through these archetypes. Jung argued that there is no way to prove the existence of God – all that can be asserted is that God exists as a psychic reality.

15
Q

What is Irreducible complexity?

A

The idea that some biological organisms are too complex to evolve without the help of an unevolved intelligence.

16
Q

What did Freud say happened in Primal hordes?

A

In these hordes dominant males have ‘first pick’ of the breading females and become the natural leaders of these groups. Within the horde younger male members become resentful. This resentment and jealousy is coupled with their respect for the dominant male as head of the horde. Freud called their attitude to the father ambivalent. Eventually, they plot to kill him.
After his death, they begin to idolise the father figure, setting him up as a totem. The horde experiences a traumatic collective guilt which is transferred to some object or animal: the mind deflects the feelings of guilt onto the new totem.

17
Q

What did Jung say the purpose of religion was?

A

Jung argued that religion is a necessary safety feature, acting as a balance, preventing disparity, between different archetypes and thereby preventing neurosis. This process is called individuation.

18
Q

What did Karl Marx think religion is used for?

A

Past societies tried to keep the exploited class under control by using elaborated political organisations, laws, customs, traditions, ideologies, religions and rituals. Marx argued that personality, beliefs and activities are shaped by these institutions. By recognising these forces, he reasoned, people will be able to overcome them through revolutionary action.

19
Q

What did Max Weber think the power of religion came from?

A

The German sociologist Max Weber believed that the power of religion is wrapped up with the power of the charismatic leaders who begin religious movements, and with the people who continue their work. He made some distinctions between mainstream religion and the ‘sect’. He tried to find a positive role for religion in the development of society.

20
Q

How did Michael Behe attack Darwinism?

A

He argued that life at a molecular level is so complex that it could not have come about by small incremental changes. Everything has to function at the same time; it would not work if parts only evolved gradually. Behe says Darwin has no explanation for such life. The best explanation is God.

21
Q

What is intelligent design?

A

The idea that the universe must have a designer rather than being the result of change or undirected natural processes.

22
Q

What is a Goldilocks zone?

A

the “Goldilocks Zone” around stars where planets with Earth-like conditions could develop. The “Goldilocks Zone” is a range of distance from a star where it is not too close to be too hot for an Earth-like planet, and not too far away to be too cold for an Earth-like planet. The distance is “just right” for an Earth-like planet.

23
Q

How did Freud say the Oedipus complex was linked to religion?

A

Freud noted more complicated emotions at work. He traced these conflicts back to when the child is being breast-fed. Once it is weaned, the child becomes more aware of the world beyond its mother. It sees its father apparently replacing it in its mother’s affections, and it experiences feelings of jealousy towards him. Freud calls this the Oedipus complex. The child represses the conflict into its subconscious mind. Throughout its adult life, this repressed memory then takes the form of a neurotic obsession. In particular, the jealousy felt towards the father manifests itself in the apparent religious obsession with God as a father figure.

24
Q

What did Freud say the purpose of religion is?

A

Freud was arguing that religion is a way of dealing with the inner guilt that is experienced as a result of the Oedipus complex (with its feeling of sexual repression), coupled with the natural fear of a disordered universe. Feelings of powerlessness are dealt with through the totemic projection of father figure and the ritualistic practices of religion.

25
Q

What is creationism?

A

An acceptance of the Genesis account of the creation of the universe as factual truth.

26
Q

What did Anthony Flew write?

A

Antony Flew wrote that the biggest challenge to the believer is accepting that the existence of evil and suffering is a major problem that demands an adequate response. The problem faced by monotheists demands a solution, not of qualification; in which the nature of God is arbitrarily changed to suit different circumstances – this concept of God ‘dies the death of a thousand qualifications,’ but by the rational justification of God’s right to allow evil and suffering to continue despite his ability to stop it.

27
Q

What does the Irenaen theodicy say?

A

God could not have created humans in perfect likeness of himself because attaining the likeness of God requires the willing co-operation of humans. God thus had to give humans free will in order for them to be able to willingly co-operate. Since freedom requires the ability to choose good over evil, God had to permit evil and suffering to occur.
Natural Evil: Has the divine purpose to develop qualities such as compassion through the soul-making process
Moral Evil: Derived from human free will and disobedience
Irenaeus concluded that eventually evil and suffering will be overcome and humans will develop into a perfect likeness of God, and everyone will have eternal life in heaven.

28
Q

What are the criticisms of the Free will defense?

A

? The question can be raised – is the magnitude of suffering really necessary for human development?
? Some argue that God could have created free agents without risking bringing evil and suffering into the world - there is nothing logically inconsistent about a free agent that always chooses goodness over evil.
? If I had the chance to prevent a murder from happening but chose to let it happen I could not use the free-will defence to justify my inaction. It would be unacceptable for a human being to argue that they were right in not preventing the murder, even if they were able to, simply because they wanted to preserve the free-will of the murderer. So why should this justification be more acceptable coming from God?

29
Q

What is the problem of evil?

A

However, the existence of evil and suffering in the world provides a challenge to the loving God of classical theism- omnipotence, omniscience and omni benevolence.
Augustine, in his book ‘Confessions,’ recognised this problem:“Either God is not able to abolish evil or not willing; if he is not able then he is not all-powerful, if he is not willing then he is not all-good.”

30
Q

What were Hick’s counter arguments to the criticisms of the free will defense?

A

Hick argued that either we demand a world free of evil and suffering in which there would be no free-will or we accept the world as it is now. If we say that some evils are too great then we begin to go down a scale of evils until even the slightest evil becomes too great e.g. if we say cancer is too severe, what about heart disease, flu or even a headache?
Hick argued that if morally free agents existed which could only choose good, humans would not be truly free since their actions would have been decided before they came into existence, even if they were under the illusion that they were acting freely.

31
Q

How did Hicks reform the Irenean theodicy?

A

John Hick highlighted the importance of God allowing humans to develop themselves. He reasoned that if God made us perfect, then we would have the goodness of robots, which would love God automatically without any further deliberation.
If God interfered or became to close,

32
Q

What are the counter arguments made to these criticisms of Irenean theodicy?

A
  • If life suddenly ceased to exist God would not have achieved his purpose
  • The supreme life in Heaven is required in order to justify the amplitude of suffering and evil on earth
  • Some ‘evil people’ cannot be held responsible for their evil actions; for example mentally retarded people
33
Q

How did Augustine define evil?

A

Augustine defined evil as the privation of goodness, just as blindness is a privation of sight. Since evil is not an entity in itself, just like blindness is not an entity in itself, God could not have created it.

34
Q

What is the inconsistent triad?

A

A triangle of three statements- Evil exists, God is omnipotent, God is omnibenevolent. The three are logically inconsistent. If God is omnipotent, he is aware of the existing evil and suffering and knows how to put a stop to it. If God is omni benevolent he will want to put a stop to it. Yet evil and suffering does exist.

35
Q

Why do supporters of the Free will defense say that divine intervention is bad?

A

divine intervention would compromise human freedom thus preventing human development. Swinburne used the example of death – death brings about suffering but is necessary to ensure humans take their responsibilities seriously. Swinburne wrote: ‘If there is always a second chance there is no risk.’

36
Q

Why did Irenaeus think evil was useful?

A

Useful as a means of knowledge. Hunger leads to pain, and causes a desire to feed. Knowledge of pain prompts humans to seek to help others in pain.
Character building. Evil offers the opportunity to grow morally. If we were programmed to ‘do the right thing’ there would be no moral value to our actions. ‘We would never learn the art of goodness in a world designed as a complete paradise’ Swinburne.
A predictable environment. The world runs to a series of natural laws. These laws are independent of our needs, and operate regardless of anything. Natural evil is when these laws come into conflict with our own perceived needs.

37
Q

How did John Hick define evil?

A

John Hick defined evil as “physical pain, mental suffering and moral wickedness” For Hick, the consequence of evil is suffering

38
Q

What is moral evil?

A

The result of human immorality e.g. genocide

39
Q

What is AUGUSTINIAN THEODICY (SOUL-DECIDING THEODICY) based on?

A

Based on the narratives of Genesis 1-3, the fall of man.

Genesis 1:31: “God saw all that he had made and saw that it was very good”

40
Q

How can Irenean theodicy be summarized?

A

Humans were created in the image and likeness of God.
We are in an immature moral state, though we have the potential for moral perfection.
Throughout our lives we change from being human animals to ‘children of God’.
This is a choice made after struggle and experience, as we choose God rather than our baser instinct.
There are no angels or external forces at work here.
God brings in suffering for the benefit of humanity.
From it we learn positive values, and about the world around us.

41
Q

What are the criticisms of Irenean theodicy?

A
  • The idea that everyone goes to heaven is not just, it is inconsistent with Orthodox Christianity and ‘The Fall’ of Genesis 3. It also demotes Jesus’ role from ‘saviour’ to ‘moral role model’
  • Is the magnitude of suffering really necessary for soul making? e.g. the Holocaust
  • D.Z. Phillips in ‘The Concept of Prayer’ argued that the continuation of evil and suffering is not a demonstration of love from an omni benevolent God
42
Q

Why did Irenaeus think evil existed?

A

Like Augustine, Irenaeus argued that evil is the consequence of human free will and disobedience. However, unlike Augustine Irenaeus believed that God was partly responsible for evil and suffering. Irenaeus argued that God created the world imperfectly so that imperfect immature beings could develop through a soul-making process into a ‘child of God,’ in his perfect likeness.

43
Q

What did David Hume argue?

A

only three possibilities exist:
I. God is not omnipotent
II. God is not omni benevolent
III. Evil does not exist

Since we have sufficient direct experience to support the existence of evil, if God exists he is either an impotent God or a malicious God; not the God of classical theism. Hume concluded that God therefore does not exist.

44
Q

What are the strengths of Irenean theodicy?

A

Unlike Augustine’s theory, it can be reconciled with scientific knowledge.
Unlike Augustine’s theory, it does not create a contradiction between a loving God, and evil and suffering in the world.
It is more in keeping with God’s loving nature, than Augustine’s theory.
Helps to explain the existence of evil and suffering in both a natural and moral sense.

45
Q

How can Augustinian theodicy be summarized?

A

God is perfect. The world he created reflects that perfection.
Humans were created with free will.
Sin and death entered the world through Adam and Eve, and their disobedience.
Adam and Eve’s disobedience brought about ‘disharmony’ in both humanity and Creation.
The whole of humanity experiences this disharmony because we were all ‘seminally’ present in the loins of Adam.
Natural evil is consequence of this disharmony of nature brought about by the Fall.
God is justified in not intervening because the suffering is a consequence of human action.

46
Q

What is the Free will defense?

A

The free-will defence incorporates the notion of free-will underlined in the Augustinian and Irenaen theodicies. The free-will defence is based on the premise that moral evil stems from moral agents, and free agency is a necessary condition for human development. The goodness of free agency outweighs the evil derived from free moral agents.

47
Q

What did John Hick say would happen if God interfered or became too close?

A

humans would be unable to make a free choice and thus would not benefit from the developmental process. This is known as the counterfactual hypothesis. Therefore God created humans at an epistemic distance from himself, a distance of knowledge.

48
Q

What are the criticisms of Augustinian theodicy?

A

It is a logical contradiction to make the claim that a perfectly created world went wrong since this implies that evil created itself ex nihilno which is a logical contradiction. Either the world was not perfect to start with or God made it go wrong – if this is the case it is God and not humans who are to blame and the existence of evil is not justified.
If the world was perfect and there was no knowledge of good and evil, how could Adam and Eve have the freedom to disobey God if goodness and evil were as yet unknown? The disobedience of Adam and Eve and the angels implies that there already was knowledge of good and evil. Augustine’s interpretation of the tree of knowledge therefore is questionable.
Augustine’s view is also inconsistent with the theory of evolution which asserts that the universe began in chaos and is continually developing, not diminishing over time.
Augustine’s view that every human in seminally present in the loins Adam is biologically inaccurate and the question can be raised; is God really justified in allowing punishment of one human being for the sin of another human being?

49
Q

What are the strengths of Augustinian theodicy?

A
  • It is based on the bible and does not contradict the scriptures
  • Evil is not originally part of God’s creative work
  • It stresses the value of free will as the best choice God could have made for mankind
  • God is therefore not responsible for man’s evil choices
50
Q

What did Aquinas argue?

A

Aquinas argued that God’s goodness is infinitely different to human goodness (although he does maintain that both have points of correspondence). Therefore, it is conceivable that God allows evil and suffering to exist as a part of his greater plan of love

51
Q

Why does Augustine say evil exists?

A

The existence of evil originates from free will possessed by angels and humans, who turned their back on God and settled for a lesser form of goodness thus creating a privation of goodness as the narrative of ‘the fall’ in Genesis 3 tries to explain. As a result the state of perfection was ruined by sin.
Natural Evil: Occurred because of the loss of order in nature, defined by Augustine as the ‘penal consequences of sin’
Moral Evil: Derived from human free will and disobedience

52
Q

Why does Augustine say that evil and suffering is necessary?

A

Augustine reasoned that all humans are worthy of the punishment of evil and suffering because we are “seminally present in the loins of Adam”’ deserving of the punishment for original sin. God has the right not to intervene and put a stop to evil and suffering since he is a just God and we are worthy of punishment. It is by his grace and infinite love however, that we are able to accept his offer of salvation and eternal life in heaven.

53
Q

What is Natural evil?

A

The apparent malfunctioning of the natural world e.g. diseases and natural disasters

54
Q

What are the weaknesses of Irenean theodicy?

A

Heaven for all is unjust.
What is the incentive to come closer to God’s likeness if everyone goes to heaven.
Why would it be necessary for so much suffering to exist.
Why couldn’t God have chosen to create free agents who didn’t contemplate evil?
Can suffering really be good for humans?

55
Q

What are the strengths of the moral argument?

A

Explains why we have an innate experience of right and wrong
Is it not possible that God gave us the super-ego or designed the brain that way?
No proof that the conscience doesn’t come from god.

56
Q

What is Kant’s second argument?

A

Our moral experience tells us that we are under an obligation to strive for the Highest Good. Kant’s second argument follows:
Duty - Morality demands that we strive for this Higher Good. If it is our obligation to follow the law, it is our obligation to aim for the highest goal of this law. Remember Kant is a deontologist.
Weakness - It is not possible for a human being to achieve this Higher Good with out assistance. Since we are not the ‘cause of the world’, we cannot bring about the Highest Good. Even if we could achieve perfect morality, we could not ensure the ‘necessary connection’ for the perfect happiness that would follow. Humans therefore lack the necessary power to bring about the Highest Good.
Assistence - God must exist to assist us in achieving this Higher Good.

57
Q

What is Kant’s starting argument?

A

Kant’s starting point is the assumption that the universe is inherently ‘good’. If the universe was not ‘good’ then morality would be meaningless.
However, it is evident that in the world it is not always the good who prosper and experience happiness. Quite often evil doers go unpunished.
In order to restore the balance of justice there must be the opportunity for the good to be rewarded in the next life. Likewise, there must be the opportunity for the evil doers to be punished.
Kant therefore argues that there must be an after life.
God must therefore exist to facilitate it.

58
Q

What would it mean if God commands something because it is good?

A

then God is no longer necessary for an ethical system to work – the almighty Sovereign becomes subordinate to a higher law.

59
Q

What did Freud think of religion?

A

For Freud, religion is merely an obsessional neurosis. So called religious influences can be attributed to obsessive neurotic behaviour. Kant was attempting to develop a philosophy independent of religion. For a psychologist like Freud, Kant was subconsciously being influnced by his strong pious unbringing which had been nurtured by his parents’ Lutheran faith

60
Q

Why did Kant design the Moral argument?

A

Kant did not think of the Moral Argument as actual proof for the existence of God. The Moral Argument fitted in with Kant’s desire to seek a universal moral principle. He believed that morality and justice were governed by universal laws in just the same way as the laws of nature. This is the basis of his famous categorical imperative. Moreover, the Moral Argument, as it develops, fits in and supports his deontological ethical system. For Kant, humanity has a duty to be morally good. Like many of Kant’s arguments it is ‘a priori’.

61
Q

What was Kant’s starting point for the Moral argument?

A

Kant’s starting point was that we all have a sense of innate moral awareness:
‘Two things fill the mind with ever new increasing admiration and awe… the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me’

62
Q

If something was good because God commands it, what would that mean?

A

the content of morality is seemingly arbitrary and dependent on God’s whim – certain moral actions could have been deemed otherwise immoral had God willed it. Furthermore, this reduces God’s goodness to his power – to say that God is good simply means that he is capable of enforcing his commands.

63
Q

What are the criticisms of the moral argument?

A
  • Moral laws may not be objective or about obeying moral duty. For Joseph Fletcher ignoring individual circumstances will lead to callous and unsatisfactory actions
  • The moral argument does not prove the existence of God. Just because our conscience points to a source does not mean that source is God. Could be merely a being that devises laws – “a Kantian-minded angel”
  • Kant’s assumption that ought implies can only proves that it is logically possible to bring about the summum bonum – just because it is not a logical contradiction does not means it actually happens
64
Q

What is Kant’s moral argument?

A
  1. We all have a sense of innate moral awareness – from this we are under obligation to be virtuous
  2. An ‘average’ level of virtue is not enough, we are obliged to aim for the highest standard possible
  3. True virtue should be rewarded with happiness
  4. There is an ideal state where human virtue and happiness are united – this Kant called the ‘Summum Bonum’
  5. Moral statements are prescriptive – ‘ought’ implies ‘can’
  6. Humans can achieve virtue in a lifetime but it is beyond us to ensure we are rewarded with happiness
  7. Therefore there must be a God who has power to ensure that virtue and happiness coincide
    Kant’s moral argument does not postulate that God is necessary for morality but that God is required for morality to achieve its end
65
Q

What is the Divine Command theory?

A

The theory that morality is absolute and dictated by God

66
Q

What does Brian Davies say about the moral argument?

A

Kant assumes that only God can bring about the summum bonum but it could equally be brought about by a ‘pantheon of angels.’

67
Q

What does Freud think morality is influenced by?

A

a person’s moral sense comes from the ‘super ego’ – an ‘inner parent’ which rewards good behaviour and punishes bad. The conscience is in fact the action of the super-ego. Actions that are normally thought of as being a matter of conscience are really determined by unconscious influences.

68
Q

What does Kant’s second moral argument suggest about the existence of good and the afterlife?

A

It is illogical to have a Highest Good that is impossible to achieve. Kant therefore argued that it was logically necessary to accept both the existence of God, and of eternal life. God is the being that brings about happiness as a reward for virtue. Since happiness clearly does not come about in this life for the majority, there must be a life beyond death in which the reward comes.

69
Q

What did Freud argue that our conscience came from?

A

Freud argued that our conscience was a product of the unconscious mind or super ego of the human psyche.

70
Q

Why does Freud argue that conscience can’t be due to Divine origin?

A

For Freud, our moral awareness cannot be of divine origin because of the differing opinions on ethical issues – if it were morality would be absolute and we would all come to the same moral conclusions. Rather, our conscience or moral awareness is the super-ego of the mind, a ‘moral policeman’ developed during child hood (more specifically the third stage which is known as the phallic stage between 3 and 6 years old).

71
Q

What is the Euthyphro dilemma?

A

“Is something good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is good?”

72
Q

What are the weaknesses of the Moral argument?

A

Cultural differences in morality
Does not account for a clash of morality
It’s too pragmatic for his own uses
Too big of a leap to assume conscience comes from good
If this life is unfair, why would the afterlife be different?
Assumes a reward is needed for morality.
Social reward to morality

73
Q

What did Cardinal Newman say about the moral argument?

A

“We feel responsibility, are ashamed, are frightened at transgressing the voice of conscience, this implies that there is one to whom we are responsible.” For Newman, the existence of conscience implies a moral law-giver whom we are answerable to – God.

74
Q

How did Freud distinguish between the three components of the psyche?

A
  1. ID – basic instincts and primitive desires e.g. hunger, lust etc.
  2. EGO – perceptions of the external that makes us aware of the ‘reality principle,’ one’s most outward part and personality
  3. SUPER-EGO – the unconscious mind which consists of:
    a. The Ego-ideal which praises good actions
    b. The conscience which makes you feel guilty for bad actions
75
Q

What does Aquinas’ fifth way say?

A
  1. All natural occurrences show evidence of design
  2. This suggests that there is a being that directs all things
  3. Things that lack knowledge cannot achieve anything unless directed by a thing with knowledge
  4. There is therefore an intelligent being that directs everyone towards a purpose
  5. For Aquinas, this being is God
76
Q

Who was Hume responding to with his criticisms?

A

It is important to remember that Hume predates Paley by 20-30 years. Hume was not responding to Paley but rather the argument as outlined by thinkers such as Plato, Cicero and Aquinas.

77
Q

How does Darwinism challenge the teleological argument?

A

Darwinism thus postulates that the fittest and healthiest members of society survive and their characteristics are passed down – giving the appearance of design in the universe. Geneticist Steve Jones described the evolutionary process as: ‘a series of successful mistakes’

78
Q

What does the Teleological argument attempt to do?

A

The word ‘Telos’ is Greek for purpose. The Teleological argument thus argues that the universe is being directed towards a telos, an end purpose, and the a posteriori evidence of an apparent intelligent design in the world implies the existence of an intelligent designer, God.

79
Q

What is Paley’s analogy of the watch?

A

A man walks across a heath and finds a rock. He attributes the existence of the rock to nature. He walks further and stumbles across a watch. After some examination he concludes that its purpose is to measure time. Due to the complexities of the watch, he concludes that it is impossible to suppose that the watch had come about without the agency of a ‘watch maker.’

80
Q

How does Paley support design qua regularity?

A

There is evidence for a creator in the regularity of the universe. The relationships between the planets and the effect of gravity could not have come about without a designing principle at work – God. For example, if gravity was slightly stronger or weaker the universe would not exist today; the inference being that there is a calculating being who purposefully created the universe according to a well-constructed plan.

81
Q

How did Richard Dawkins challenge the teleological argument?

A

Richard Dawkins, a biological materialist and reductionist, supported Darwin by arguing that random mutations in DNA alone give rise to variation in the world and the illusion of design. For Dawkins, life amounts to nothing more that bytes of digital information contained in the quaternary code, DNA.

82
Q

What are the two parts of William Paley’s argument?

A

In his book, ‘Natural Theology,’ William Paley presents his own form of the Teleological argument.

  1. Design qua Purpose – the universe was designed to fulfil a purpose
  2. Design qua Regularity – the universe behaves according to some order
83
Q

What does the analogy of the watch suggest?

A

The watch is like the universe – it is too complex to have just happened by chance. It is impossible therefore to suppose that the universe had come about without the agency of a ‘universe maker’ – God.

84
Q

Weaknesses of the teleological argument?

A

The designer of the world may have a designer: this leads to an infinite regress.
Analogous design argument’s (like Paley’s) constrain and reduce nature, because they suggest that nature is like manmade objects and artefacts. (Robert Hambourger)
Arguments from analogy (like Paley’s) are flawed when the inference from one case to another is too great. In other words, worlds are not like watches.
The design argument does not tell us anything about the creator/designer: it is just as possible to use this argument to say that God is evil rather than omnibenevolent (look at all the natural disasters and diseases like cancer). (Stephen Law)
The design argument does not necessarily lead to the God of classical theism.
Just because we are here to marvel at the incredible fact of our own existence, does not mean that it didn’t come about by chance. Random processes could create a universe with complex and beautiful structures: they might come about rarely and remain, whereas ugly and dysfunctional structures may die away. (Robert Hambourger)
Evolutionary theory and natural selection seem to suggest that complex organisms arose through genetic mutation, not through design.

85
Q

What did Hume believe?

A

Hume subscribed to a belief in the theory of evolution and the idea that series of random adaptations made in order to survive (the theory of natural selection) could lead to the apparent intelligent design of humans.

86
Q

How did Hume criticize the teleological argument?

A

Hume set out two versions of the design argument and then criticised them:
(1)- To speak of design is to imply a designer
- Great design implies a great designer
- There is great design in the world
- Therefore, there must be a great designer – God
This implies a superhuman, anthropomorphic concept of God (a God who is human-like) which is inconsistent with the notion of perfection. Moreover, the world is imperfect and flawed thus implying an incompetent designer.
(2)- The world is ordered
- This is due to either chance or design
- It is very possible the world came about by chance
- Therefore the world came about through design
Hume argued that there is nothing in this argument to suppose there is only one creator – there may be a team of lesser Gods who built the world. This supports the theory of paganism

87
Q

What are the strengths of the Teleological argument?

A

The strengths of the design argument are the strengths of inductive reasoning: inductive arguments begin with something that we can observe. It is difficult to deny the presence of order and complexity in the universe.
The argument does not rely upon fixed definitions that we must accept (unlike the ontological argument).
The use of analogy (the watchmaker) in this argument makes it comprehensible to us: it moves from something within our experience to try to explain something beyond it (the creation of the universe); the argument is simple and straightforward to follow.
It fits in with human reason; it encourages and deepens the study of nature; it suggests purpose in the universe; it strengthens faith.
The argument is not necessarily incompatible with evolution and Big Bang: both of these processes could be part of the design of the universe.
The concept of God as designer reinforces the idea that God is involved in the history of the universe and is therefore omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent.
The design argument gives a purpose to the universe, rather than having blind nature moving in a random direction. This in turn gives the universe meaning.

88
Q

How does Mill criticize the teleological argument?

A

In ‘Nature and the Utility of Religion’ John Stuart Mill criticises the Teleological argument. Mill postulates that nature is guilty of serious crimes for which she goes unpunished, and the atrocities through which humans and animals suffer would not go unpunished if they were the result of human agency.“Nearly all the things which men are hanged or imprisoned for doing to one another are nature’s everyday performances.” For Mill, there is no intelligent design apparent in the universe and if there is a designer he is either an incompetent or cruel designer: “Either there is no God or there exists an incompetent or immoral God”

89
Q

Who else outlined a teleological argument?

A

Plato also outlined a Teleological Argument. The Roman orator Cicero also looked at the natural order of things and was convinced that there must be some superior intelligence to explain it all.

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?
90
Q

What is the teleological argument founded on?

A

The Teleological argument is founded on Aquinas’s fifth way: The Argument From Intelligent Design

91
Q

How does Paley used the example of the eye to support design qua purpose?

A

It is obvious that the eye was designed with the specific purpose to see. Thus there is a Designing Creator – God.

92
Q

What does the argument from contingency mean?

A

This Way is sometimes referred to as the modal cosmological argument. Modal is a reference to contingency and necessary. This Way defines two types of objects in the universe: contingent beings and necessary beings. A contingent being is an object that cannot exist without a necessary being causing its existence. Aquinas believed that the existence of contingent beings would ultimately necessitate a being which must exist for all of the contingent beings to exist. This being, called a necessary being, is what we call God.

93
Q

What does the argument from Causation mean?

A

This Way deals with the issue of existence. Aquinas concluded that common sense observation tells us that no object creates itself. In other words, some previous object had to create it. Aquinas believed that ultimately there must have been an UNCAUSED FIRST CAUSE (GOD) who began the chain of existence for all things.

94
Q

What does the argument from motion mean?

A

St. Thomas Aquinas, studying the works of the Greek philosopher Aristotle, concluded from common observation that an object that is in motion (e.g. the planets, a rolling stone) is put in motion by some other object or force. From this, Aquinas believes that ultimately there must have been an UNMOVED MOVER (GOD) who first put things in motion. Aquinas argues that the natural condition is for things to be at rest. Something which is moving is therefore unnatural and must have been put into that state by some external supernatural power.

95
Q

What does the argument from degrees and perfection mean?

A

St. Thomas formulated this Way from a very interesting observation about the qualities of things. For example one may say that of two marble sculptures one is more beautiful than the other. So for these two objects, one has a greater degree of beauty than the next. This is referred to as degrees or gradation of a quality. From this fact Aquinas concluded that for any given quality (e.g. goodness, beauty, knowledge) there must be a perfect standard by which all such qualities are measured. These perfections are contained in God.

96
Q

What are the strengths of the cosmological argument?

A

‘nothing can come from nothing’ said Aristotle – how else did the chain come into existence unless it was caused by something outside..
Copleston rejected the idea of infinite regress on the basis that an infinite chain could only ever consist of contingent beings which could never have brought about their own existence.
if the explanation for the universe’ existence cannot be found within the universe it is logical to look outside for the cause.
Copleston‘s answer to Russell was that partial explanations are unsatisfactory and that an adequate explanation is one to which nothing further can be added therefore the idea that the universe ‘just is’ is insufficient. And God is the complete explanation.
Because if God is self-causing he does not need an explanation.
If God is as Anselm said ‘that than which no greater can be conceived’ then that would make him a necessary being, and could be the cause of the universe.
It is a logical argument – we see order, cause and effect all around us.
Does explain why it has this order and why beauty exists.

97
Q

What is the argument from intelligent design?

A

The final Way that St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of has to do with the observable universe and the order of nature. Aquinas states that common sense tells us that the universe works in such a way, that one can conclude that is was designed by an intelligent designer, God. In other words, all physical laws and the order of nature and life were designed and ordered by God, the intelligent designer

98
Q

What are the weaknesses of the cosmological argument?

A

First cause only necessary if we reject the idea of infinite regress.
Does depend on the idea that God is a necessary being. Just because something can exist does not mean that it must!
Why God as the cause not something else?
Why exempt God from causation?
Also Russell ‘the universe just is – Brute Fact.’
Hume suggested that maybe cause and effect are just the way we see things not necessarily linked.
The premises do not allow of such a leap of conclusion.
The argument Hume claims begins with something familiar to us and then goes on to makes claims about things outside of our experience.

99
Q

How does the The Australian philosopher Paul Edwards illustrate Russel’s issue with talking about the cause of the universe as a whole?

A

Each is given a different explanation of why they each Inuit is in New York: the first wanted warmer weather, the second is the husband of the first, the third is the son of the first and the second, the fourth is responding to an advertisement in the New York Times asking for Inuit to appear on television, and the fifth has been hired by a private detective agency to keep an eye on the fourth. Although an individual explanation can be given why each Inuit is in New York, it does not make sense to then ask the one reason why the group as a whole are in New York.

100
Q

How did Fredrick Copleston formulate Aquinas’ argument in the radio debate?

A

1) There are things in this world that are contingent – they might not have existed e.g. we would not exist without our parents
2) All things in the world are like this – everything depends on something else for it’s existence
3) Therefore there must be a cause of everything in the universe that exists outside of it
4) This cause must be a necessary being – one which contains the reason for it’s existence inside itself
5) This necessary being is God

101
Q

When did the Russel Vs Copleston radio debate take place?

A

1947

102
Q

What is the Cosmological argument based on?

A

The Cosmological argument is based on the first three of Aquinas’ Five Ways
THE ARGUMENT FROM MOTION
THE ARGUMENT FROM CAUSATION
THE ARGUMENT FROM CONTINGENCY

103
Q

How did Copleston respond to Russel’s refusal to acknowledge the importance of the question?

A

“If one refused to sit at the chess board and make a move, one cannot, of course, be checkmated.”

104
Q

Who is the cosmological argument designed to do?

A

The word ‘cosmos’ refers to the universe as an ordered, harmonious and holistic entity. The Cosmological argument therefore argues for the existence of God a posteriori based on the apparent order in the universe.

105
Q

In what way to Russel refuse to accept the cosmological argument in the radio debate?

A

Russell refused to accept the notion of a necessary being as one that cannot be thought of not existing, and concluded that the regress of causal events could not be held responsible for the existence of everything in the universe: “what I am saying is that the concept of cause is not applicable to the total”
Just because each human has a mother does not mean the entire human race has a mother. He reduced the universe to a mere, brute fact, of which it’s existence does not demand an explanation.“I should say that the universe is just there, and that’s all.”
Russell saw the argument for a cause of the universe as having little meaning or significance. He established it as a “question that has no meaning” and thus proposed: “Shall we pass on to some other issue?

106
Q

Why did Aquinas develop the cosmological argument?

A

Aquinas thus asked the question: is it obvious that there is a God? His answer was no – since such a concept is beyond all direct human experience. He then asked the question: can it be made obvious? Aquinas believed that, since the universe is God’s creation, evidence of God’s existence can be found in his creation using intellect and reason

107
Q

What are Immanuel Kant’s criticism of the cosmological argument?

A

Immanuel Kant, in ‘Critique of Pure Reason,’ opposed the theory that a chain of cause-effect events can be set in motion from outside the realm of the physical universe. The cause-effect relationship is observed within the confines of the spatio-temporal world, and therefore any talk of the causal cycle stretching beyond the empirical world is non-sensical.

108
Q

What are Aquinas’ fourth and five ways?

A

Fourth Way - The Argument From Degrees And Perfection

Fifth Way - The Argument From Intelligent Design

109
Q

What is Hume’s criticism of the Cosmological argument?

A

To move from ‘everything we observe has a cause’ to ‘the universe has a cause’ is too big a leap in logic. This is the same as saying that because all humans have a mother, the entire human race has a mother.
Hume maintains that the Cosmological argument begins with familiar concepts of the universe and concludes with not-so-familiar concepts beyond human experience. For Hume, God’s existence cannot be proven analytically (by definition), since the definition of God’s nature is not knowable. Hume concludes that it is not possible to prove the existence of a being who is unknowable and existentially different from all other beings.

110
Q

What do the second and third premises of the first form of the ontological argument mean?

A

The second and third premises (2 and 3) argue that something that exists in reality is better than something that exists only in ones imagination. For example, which is better imagining that you have £1 million, or actually having £1 million in your bank account?

111
Q

Who was Rene Descartes?

A

Rene Descartes (1596-1650) is generally regarded the founder of modern western philosophy. Descartes was instrumental in bringing about the Age of the Enlightenment in Western Europe. His writings challenged conventional beliefs which were still based upon Church teachings.

112
Q

How did Descartes respond to Anselm’s ontological argument?

A

Like Anselm, Descartes thought of God in terms of a perfect being. Following Anselm’s first argument, Descartes was in agreement that existence was more perfect than non-existence. For Descartes, God’s existence was part of His essence. For Descartes, there are some qualities that an object necessarily has or else it would not be that object. To illustrate this Descartes argued that the essence of a triangle is a ‘three sided plane figure’. To say that God does not exist is rather like saying ‘a triangle does not have three sides’ or that the internal angels don’t add up to 180o. In the same way, existence cannot be separated from the concept of God.

113
Q

How did Caterus respond to Descartes argument?

A

Caterus argued that the statement ‘If God exists then he is highest being’ was a tautology (the truth of the statement is self evident). But Caterus emphasised the word ‘if’. It was not illogical to say, ‘God does not exist therefore there is no highest being’. To use Descartes’ analogy of a triangle it is possible to say, ‘If a triangle exists it has three sides’. However, all this really tells us is something about triangles. It is equally coherent to say, ‘triangles do not exist therefore three sided things do not exist.’ Likewise, we might say, ‘unicorns have one horn’ but this does not prove there are any unicorns.

114
Q

What are the strengths of Anselm’s ontological argument?

A
  • Anselm provides a clear logical (analytic) argument to demonstrate the existence of God.
  • As a deductive argument, if valid, it holds out the hope of a proof.
  • As even a ‘fool’ can understand the concept of God then the argument provides the same starting point for everyone
  • It fits in with the Cosmological argument – the universe is contingent and must therefore be dependant on a necessary being, something argued in both the Ontological and Cosmological arguments.
  • Some have argued that Anselm was not trying to prove God’s existence but reflecting on the fact that God necessarily existed. This fits with Anselm’s claim that you contradict yourself if you deny God exists.
115
Q

What is the flaw in Gaunilo argument (How did Anslem respond)

A

There will be disagreements as to what makes an island perfect
By definition any piece of land surrounded by water is an island. In this case all islands are perfect islands.
Anselm argued that he was not talking about temporal contingent things such as islands which are rooted in time and space. Such things are dependent upon other things for their existence. Anselm is talking about the greatest thing that can be thought. God is not contingent or temporal. God’s existence is necessary

116
Q

What does contingent mean?

A

that which need not be, that which could have been different; something that has dependency.

117
Q

What is an inductive argument?

A

Inductive arguments are based on observation. The validity of inductive arguments can vary from 0% to 100% as they are based on empirical observation and not internal logic. Premise (1) and (2) may well be true but the conclusion (3) may well be a massive assumption.

118
Q

What was Anselm’s second argument?

A

Either God exists or He does not exist
If God exists, God’s existence must be necessary
If God does not exist, then his existence is logically impossible
God is not a logically impossible thing
Therefore, God’s existence is necessary
Therefore, God exists

119
Q

How does Anselm conduct this argument as as process of eliminations?

A

God cannot be an existing contingent being (e.g. like you and me!)
God cannot be a non-existent contingent being (e.g. a unicorn)
God cannot be a logically impossible being (e.g. an omnipotent God who is impotent)
God cannot be a necessary non-existent being (it is logically impossible)
God must be a necessary existent being.

120
Q

What is a synthetic statement?

A

Synthetic statements, on the other hand, are based on our sensory data and experience. - Used in inductive arguments.

121
Q

What is meant by If God does not exist, then his existence is logically impossible?

A

There are two kinds of things which cannot exist:
contingent things e.g. Superman, unicorns or Queen Victoria
logically impossible things e.g. square circles, male sisters
God cannot be contingent. If we are going to reject the notion of God then it must be because he is illogical. God is not a logically impossible thing as there is no logical contradiction in the notion of God. It is logically possible for him to exist.

122
Q

What is Descartes analogy of the triangle?

A

The analogy of a triangle can be used to explain Descartes’ form of the Ontological argument. A triangle has predicates (necessary characteristics); for example, all of its internal angles must add up to 180°. If these predicates are removed the triangle is no longer a triangle. Anslem said, in the same way, existence is a predicate of God.

123
Q

What is meant by Therefore, God’s existence is necessary. Therefore, God exists ?

A

As God is not logically impossible and also is not a contingent non-existence thing, then there is only one possible state left: that of a necessary being. It, therefore, follows that God’s existence is necessary and God does exist.

124
Q

What does necessary mean?

A

inevitably resulting from or produced by the nature of things…etc., so that the contrary is impossible.

125
Q

Why did Anselm develop the second form of the ontological argument?

A

Anselm’s first argument left himself open to criticism from Gaulino and his perfect island.

126
Q

What was Gaunilo’s main objection to Anselm’s argument and how did Anselm respond?

A

Gaulino’s main objection to Anselm was that he thought no mere mortal could conceive (or understand) God’s nature. Anselm would have agreed with Gaulino – it is impossible to understand God in the same way one might understand geometry. However, this does not rule out the possibility to understand the concept that God is ‘that which nothing greater can be conceived’.

127
Q

What problem with Anselm’s first form of the ontological argument did Gaunilo of Marmoutiers’ raise?

A

One problem with Anselm’s ontological argument for the existence of God is that it invites parody. Parallel arguments purporting to prove the existence of any perfect thing at all can be constructed.

128
Q

What does the conclusion of the first form of the ontological argument mean?

A

The conclusion (4) follows from the first three premises (1,2 and 3). Anselm’s final conclusion (5) is that if all the previous premises are true (1,2,3 and 4) then God must exist

129
Q

What is an analytic statement?

A

Analytic sentences are true by definition, and are generally self-explanatory - used in deductive arguments.

130
Q

What does ontological mean?

A

The word ‘ontos’ means ‘being.’ The Ontological argument thus attempts to prove the existence of God a priori by focusing on the nature of his existence or being.

131
Q

What is meant by if God exists, God’s existence must be necessary?

A

It would be inconceivable to thing of God in terms of Him being contingent – i.e. dependent upon something else. If we are going to think of God in terms of Him being omnipotent…etc. then by definition God must be necessary.

132
Q

How did Kant respond to Descartes ontological argument?

A

Descartes had argued that God had existence in the same way as a triangle has three sides. Kant would agree, if you had a triangle then you did indeed have an object with three sides. But if you do not have the triangle, you have neither its three angles or its three sides. If you accept that there is a God, it is logical to accept also that His existence is necessary. But you don’t have to accept that there is a God.

133
Q

What is a deductive argument?

A

A deductive argument is one where the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises – if the premises are true then the conclusion must follow. The validity of a deductive argument depends upon its internal logic – i.e. the very definition of words determines whether or not the argument can hold to be true. A deductive argument can be said to be ‘a priori’ as it does not depend upon external validation.

134
Q

What is an overload objection?

A

they don’t claim to show where or how the ontological argument goes wrong, they simply argue that if it is sound, then so are many other arguments of the same logical form which we don’t want to accept, arguments which would overload the world with an indefinitely large number of things like perfect islands, perfect pizzas, perfect pencils, etc.

135
Q

What is Anselm’s first argument for the existence of God?

A

God is the greatest possible being (that than which nothing greater can be conceived’)
If God exists in the mind alone (only as an idea), then a greater being could be imagined to exist both in the mind and in reality
This being would then be greater than God
Thus God cannot exist only as an idea in the mind
Therefore, God exists both in the mind (as an idea) and in reality.

136
Q

What was Gaunilo of Marmoutiers’ argument against Anselm’s first form of the ontological argument?

A

Gaunilo invited his readers to think of the greatest, or most perfect, conceivable island.
As a matter of fact, it is likely that no such island actually exists.
However, his argument would then say that we aren’t thinking of the greatest conceivable island, because the greatest conceivable island would exist, as well as having all those other desirable properties.
Since we can conceive of this greatest or most perfect conceivable island, then it must exist.
Gaunilo argued that this line of argument was no less absurd than Anselm’s orginal argument. This logic is flawed, thus showing the ontological argument is flawed as a perfect island does not exist.

137
Q

Criticisms of Kant’s objections?

A

Kant said that an idea of a pile of 100 coins that exist in my mind and the pile of 100 coins that exist in reality will have the same worth. Thus adding existence to the idea will not make it any better but will only affirm of what is. -Not practical, or realistic.

138
Q

What are the weaknesses of Anselm’s ontological argument?

A

Some would argue the definition of God used is flawed- For example, if god is timeless does that mean he is outside time? And if he is outside time then how can he act within time? Another example is the idea of God’s power. If he is omnipotent and can do anything then can he act immorally? Can he create a stone that he cannot lift?
• The existence of God eliminates the need for faith. If faith is necessary then proof is unnecessary and, for some, unwanted.
• For many people God is not an external, objective being or thing. Rather they believe that God is a representation of what is most important to us.
• You can’t simply define something into existence through logic – as Gaunilo explains in his challenge to Anselm.
• Aquinas rejected the idea that that God’s existence is not self evident. Humans are not in a position to understand God’s nature and so cannot know that “God
exists” is an analytic statement.
For people of other faiths, there may indeed by something greater than God.

139
Q

What type of argument is the ontological argument?

A

It is deductive and it is analytic.

140
Q

Who came up with the Ontological argument?

A

St Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109)

141
Q

What is the simplified version of the second form of the ontological argument?

A

It is impossible to conceive of a God not existing (John Hick agreed):
1/ A necessary being is greater than a contingent being since a contingent being depends on something else for its existence and we can be thought of as not existing
2/ God can be defined as ‘that than which nothing greater can be conceived’ and therefore God must be a necessary being – his existence does not depend on other forms
3/ It is impossible to conceive of a necessary being not existing
4/ Therefore God must necessarily exist

142
Q

What is Kant’s rejection to the Ontological argument?

A

Kant’s objection to the ontological argument is that existence is not a property that can be attributed to beings like we can attribute other properties such as being blue, hard, or round. When we talk about entities existing, Kant contends that we do not mean to add existence as a property to their beings. In other words, the objection seems to be that one cannot go around adding existence as a property to God (or anything else for that matter) in order to define God (or anything else) into existence. A definition of God must be checked with reality to see if it is correct.

143
Q

How did Descartes respond to Gaulino’s criticism of Anselm’s first argument?

A

Descartes took on board Gaulino’s criticism of Anselm’s first argument. Like Anselm before him, Descartes points to the distinction between a necessary being and a contingent being. The argument applies only to an absolutely perfect and necessary being. The argument cannot be applied to islands, dragons, unicorns or even pizzas! For Descartes, God alone is the being whose essence entails His existence. There cannot be more than one such being.

144
Q

What does Anslem’s first premise in the first form of the ontological argument mean?

A

The first premise (1) that God is the greatest possible being stems from the classical attributes of God i.e. omnipotence, omnipresent, omniscience…etc. It naturally follows that there cannot be two rival omnipotent beings…etc. For Anselm (and most theistic thinkers) this understanding of God goes without saying. I. Any other definition of God would not be God.

145
Q

What are the four main qualities of God?

A
  1. Omnipotence – God is all-powerful, capable of anything
  2. Omniscience – God is all-knowing, he is knowledgeable of everything
  3. Omnipresence – God is everywhere, he is present in all situations at all times
  4. Omni benevolence – God is all-loving, he shares his infinite love with creation
146
Q

Where does movement come from according to biblical writers and Aristotle?

A

For Aristotle God creates movement by attracting everything towards himself and it is the objects that have the desire to move. In Judaeo-Christianity the will to move comes from God.

147
Q

How is the goodness of God shown through Jesus?

A

In the New Testament the goodness of God is shown in the person of Jesus. God came into the world as a man in order to demonstrate his love for humanity:
‘For God so loved the world he sent his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life’ – John 3:16

148
Q

What does Wiles say would be a problem of a God who performs miracles?

A

Wiles concludes that either God does not intervene in the natural order or He has an arbitrary will that results in His intervention to help the plight of some and ignore the needs of others. If in fact the nature of God is one that may choose to cure an individual of cancer but to ignore the plight of those trapped in the twin towers of New York on 11 September 2001, then Wiles concludes such a God, who acts selectively and not on a wider scale, is not worthy of worship. The concept of a God who arbitrarily intervenes in the universe debases the notion of God itself.

149
Q

How is God seen as a moral law giver?

A

In Judaeo-Christianity God is seen to be a judge who will bring about eschatological justice – he will elect those people worthy of salvation and an eternal life in heaven on the basis of their faith and good works in the current life. As creator and shaper of the universe, everything is answerable to God. He can therefore be seen as the primary enforcer of the moral code of the Judaeo-Christian ethical system; he is a moral law giver and is responsible for denouncing what is moral and what is not.

150
Q

What is the problem with the existence of evil if God created the universe?

A

to say that God made the creation perfectly and it was ‘very good’ does not explain the existence of evil, ugliness and less perfect forms such as disease and disabilities that we have direct and certain experience of in world. Moreover, if God created the universe and everything in it then he is solely responsible for everything that happens within the universe including evil and suffering. For example, he purposefully gave the serpent in the narrative of ‘The Fall’ its craftiness, and still established it as ‘very good.’

151
Q

What is the story of Genesis similar to?

A

Genesis is similar to Babylonian creation myths in which there were dark swirling waters before the beginning of the world. The writers of Genesis must have believed that their story was either an historic accurate account of creation, or imagery borrowed from myths to express the fundamentally inexpressible.

152
Q

How is the Will of God used to create things?

A

The will of God is required to make physical matter exist, he creates the components of the universe on his word, according to his whim: ‘Let there be…’ and there is.

153
Q

What is the difference between the approaches of Greek philosophers and biblical writings to God?

A

The key difference is that the Greeks adopted a philosophical approach to solving the mystery of the divine. Their concepts of the Form of the Good and the Prime Mover have been devised as an attempt to logically explain the existence of mankind and provide a purpose for life. A Greek philosopher’s starting point therefore is to form a rational, coherent argument to explain why God may or may not exist. However the Judaeo-Christian approach is based on the premise of faith – an abiding trust in God and a belief in the events and teachings of the bible. The bible thus does not adopt a philosophical outlook; rather it is the culmination of written works by people who all share the same faith

154
Q

How does the view of God as an expert builder contrast with Aristotle’s prime mover?

A

This contrasts with Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover. According to the bible, God is not unmoved at all and knows his creation intimately - he takes an interest and pride in the things he has made and cares about the actions of his creations.

155
Q

What is the philosophical issue of Jesus?

A

This raises the question; how could God be in human form when he is incorporeal? If God is outside space and time (transcendental and omnipresent), how can he enter the world at a fixed point in history? When God was in the world was he also in heaven at the same time?

156
Q

How has Aristotle influenced Judeo-Christian thinking?

A
  • God is unchanging, eternal, and beyond time and space (transcendental)
  • The universe and everything in it exists for a reason – it is purposeful (telos)
  • God is the causer of the creation of the universe (Prime Mover)
  • A pattern of design only capable of coming from God is evident in the world
157
Q

What are the differing views as to how God created the world in the bible?

A

It is not made clear whether God was the shaper of a chaos of pre-existing matter, a formless void, or whether God created everything out of nothing, ex nihilno. The Jewish and Christian doctrine of thought usually takes the view that God was both creator and shaper.

158
Q

What are the two stories- which describe how God created the world?

A

the Priestly tradition (Gen 1:1-2:4a) and an older version from the Yahwistic tradition (Gen 2:4b ff).-In the first creation story, God set everything in place before creating people. In the second creation story humanity came first followed by animals as possible companions.

159
Q

In what way is God shown to have righteous indignation in the bible?

A

God becomes angered at injustice because he cares about his creation, and calls upon his prophets to let his people know they are failing him. He is hurt when people refuse to recognise and respond to his goodness.
Jeremiah – ‘I have stretched out my hand against you and destroyed you – I am weary of relenting’

160
Q

How does God appear to view humanity in Genesis?

A

In Genesis humanity is the pinnacle of creation – God looks back on the sixth day and declares that it is VERY good.
God places all creation under humanity’s stewardship to look after and care for it.
Both stories suggest an anthropocentric view of creation – it has been placed here for the benefit of humanity.

161
Q

How is God affected by the ways people respond to him?

A

God is affected by the ways in which people respond to him. The prophet Hosea uses the imagery of an adult and a small child to show how God can be likened to the love and pride of a parent when a baby is taking its first steps; God’s goodness is also compared with the reins used to steady a toddler.

162
Q

What is the Euthyphro Dilemma?

A

But if God is the moral law giver, the question can be asked: is something good because God commands it – in which case the content of morality is dependent on God’s whim, or does God command something because it is good – in which case God is subordinate to a higher law. This is known as the Euthyphro Dilemma.

163
Q

How does God interact with people in the bible?

A

God sets a standard for the people to follow, and watches too see the way they respond. In Exodus 20 the Hebrew people who have been lead out of slavery by Moses into the wilderness are given laws directly from God which they are to follow as part of their covenant relationship with him. Some laws relate to their relationship with God and others to their treatment of one another; for example the10 commandments (the Decalogue):

164
Q

How is the Judea-Christian god viewed in a personal sense?

A

Within the Judeo-Christian tradition God is more than a concept – He is personal
According to this tradition, God is good in whom there is no evil
Humanity has a responsibility to live up to this goodness
Central to the Hebrew Bible (Christian Old Testament) is the concept of God making a covenant: “I will be your God and you will be my people”
For Christians God renews the covenant in the person of Jesus

165
Q

What does CREATIO EX NIHILNO mean?

A

It is a latin phrase meaning creation out of nothing.

166
Q

When is God shown to have a compassionate response to prayer?

A

God can also be moved to pity. For example at the beginning of 1 Samuel, Hannah was distraught because she had no children and asked God for a child in prayer. She conceived a baby boy soon after.

167
Q

How is goodness revealed in the bible?

A

Goodness is revealed to faith, not reason (as in Platonic thought). Some of the characters in the bible who are singled out for special commendation are those who through faith continue to obey God’s commands even if they don’t understand them.

168
Q

What does St. Augustine of Hippo suggest about time phrases used in the bible?

A

St. Augustine of Hippo suggested that time is an intrinsic part of the created world and the descriptions “in the beginning” and “creation out of nothing” do not refer to a particular moment.

169
Q

What are the main differences between Aristotle’s prime mover and the God of the Bible?

A

The God of the Bible plays an active part in bringing things into being. Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover is indifferent to creation.
The God of the Bible is active, willing things to come into being. Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover is passive, causing things to happen through attraction.
The God of the Bible desires a relationship with humanity. Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover spends eternity thinking only of himself!
The God of the Bible is personal. Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover is impersonal.

170
Q

What does Maurice Wiles (1929 - 2005) say about miracles?

A

Wiles concludes that miracles do not occur because God does not intervene in events in the world on an individual basis. If miracles did occur then God would undermine the laws of nature and the accepted order of things. Even if this does happen, why would God choose to perform miracles for some and not for others. Wiles asks why miracles have not taken place at times of great human tragedies. Those who claim that miracles do take place can only give trivial examples in comparison.

171
Q

How does God relate to creation?

A

In Genesis God is portrayed as the supreme being having no equal.
God is separate from his creation - He is transcendent.
God appears to bring order (Gk cosmos) out of disorder (Gk Chaos).
Both Judaism and Christianity assume that God did create out of nothing.

172
Q

What does Wiles say in his book, God’s Action In the World about miracles?

A

“If the direct action of God, independent of secondary causation, is an intelligible concept, then it would appear to have been sparingly and strangely used. Miracles must be by definition, relatively infrequent or else the whole idea of the laws of nature… would be undermined, and ordered life as we know it would be an impossibility. Yet even so it would seem strange that no miraculous intervention prevented Auschwitz or Hiroshima, while the purposes apparently forwarded by some of the miracles acclaimed in traditional Christian faith seem trivial by comparison”

173
Q

What is the problem with God having perfect interactive goodness?

A

God’s goodness although interactive is described as perfect. Some philosophers would say that God’s interaction makes him capable of change. Since perfection by very nature is unchanging, God cannot be perfectly good and at the same time a relationship with his creation.

174
Q

Where are there references of God as a creator?

A

The Bible is full of references to God as creator.
The Psalms often sing God’s praises as Creator:
In the Book of Job.

175
Q

How is the God of the bible portrayed?

A

transcendent
separate from and superior to the physical world
having no body – incorporeal
exists outside time and space in eternity

176
Q

Why is faith important to God and what are some examples of it?

A

Abraham is given as the model for faith Although he was old and childless, God promised Abraham that he would be the Father of a great nation (the Israelites) Through faith Abraham left his own country with the promise that God would give him a new country. Through faith Abraham was willing to sacrifice his own son Isaac. Job is another example of faith. Job continued to praise God and be faithful to him even when he had lost everything.The goodness of God demands that people respond with faith

177
Q

What is the philosophical problem of how God is portrayed in the Bible?

A

How can a transcendent God have any dealings with this temporal world? The Bible paints a very different picture of God in which there appears to be no problem with a transcendent God working in and through creation.

178
Q

What is a miracle?

A

A miracle may be described as God suspending the laws of nature in order to bring about a certain course of events.

179
Q

What are some examples of miracles in the New Testament?

A

The Virgin Birth – Matthew 1:18-25
Feeding of the Five Thousand – Mark 6:30-44
Jesus walks on water – Mark 6:45-52
Cure of a Paralytic – 5:17-26
Gerasene Demoniac – Luke 8:26-39
Jesus’ Resurrection – John 20:1 – 21:25
Peter cures a lame man – Acts 3:1-10
Peter’s miraculous deliverance – Acts 12:1-19
Paul and Silas’ miraculous deliverance – Acts 16:25-40

180
Q

What does science say about the view of Creatio ex nihilno?

A

Some scientists say that matter could not have been brought into existence when there was no matter before. Even Aristotle said – “nothing can come from nothing”

181
Q

What are some examples of miracles in the Old Testament?

A

Moses parting the Red Sea – Exodus 14:5-31
Joshua and the Walls of Jericho – Joshua 6:1-16
Joshua and the Sun standing still - Joshua 10:1-15
Elijah and the priests of Baal – 1 Kings 18:20-40
Elisha healing Naaman of leprosy 2 Kings 5:1-27
Isaiah causing a shadow to move backwards – 2 Kings 20:1-11

182
Q

How can God be viewed as an expert builder?

A

Poetic descriptions of God’s skill as craftsman of the universe can be compared with the work of an expert builder in the book of Job.

183
Q

How is God seen as a personality in the Bible?

A

God is seen more than just an ideal to follow, which remains unaffected and does not care who aspires to it. God is seen as a personality, reacting to people and caring about the way they behave.

184
Q

What is the purpose of the Ten Commandments?

A

Ten Commandments = Decalogue (i.e. the Ten Words)
Given on Mount Sinai in a Theophany
Found in Exodus 20 and Deut 5
The Law is a sign of God’s covenant – an agreement
The Ten Commandments gives directions for both religious and social responsibilities
God’s people don’t have to guess what God’s will is – it is written down for them

185
Q

Why can creation be considered inherently good according to biblical believes?

A

Everything made by God is good and purposeful – nothing exists by chance or is inferior of quality or bad – God is solely responsible for creation and described it as ‘very good.’

186
Q

What are the creation stories?

A

They are myth. Myths attempt to answer the same Ultimate Questions as philosophy but in a different way. The creation stories are anthropocentric – i.e. they don’t try and answer why creation exists, they try and answer the question why do humans exist.
The purpose of the creation stories is to introduce the ongoing relationship between God and humanity

187
Q

How are Plato influenced Judeo-Christian thinking?

A
  • First appearances are not as important as the real person (Allegory of the Cave)
  • Sense pleasures should not be the objective of one’s existence
  • There is an eternal realm where we shall live after death (Realm of Ideal Forms)
  • The soul is released form the body when you die (Dualism)
  • The concept of good has helped Christians perceive God as perfect and the source of all goodness (goodness as an ideal form)
188
Q

What are the differences between Aristotle’s prime mover and the judeo christian God?

A

The monotheistic God of Judaeo-Christianity is concerned with the actions of man and makes demands; he intervenes in the world and is responsive to human behavior. This is very unlike Plato’s Form of the Good which is an impersonal and non-interactive entity that does not have the capacity to love. Aristotle’s understanding of an unmoved mover who is unaware of his creation and only has the capacity to think about himself is also a far step from the personal and interactive God of classical theism.

189
Q

What is God like?

A

God is a benevolent dictator – treating his people as children
God is also described as ‘a jealous God’
God is angered whenever he sees injustice
The Judeo-Christian God is not Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover – he is angered whenever people fail to recognise his goodness
Jeremiah 15:6 “You have rejected me,” declares the Lord. “You keep on backsliding.
So I will reach out and destroy you; I am tired of holding back.’

190
Q

What philosophical issues are posed through the incarnation of Jesus?

A

For Christianity the goodness of God and his interaction with the world can be seen the person of Jesus Christ. Central to Christianity’s teaching is the incarnation
The incarnation poses its own particular problems – i.e. how could the transcendent eternal God become present in space and time? According to Christianity God’s goodness can be seen in Jesus’ words and actions – i.e. his teaching and miracles
Unlike Plato’s ultimate Form of the Good which is above this corruptible world, Christians believe that the word has indeed become flesh and lived among us (John 1:14)

191
Q

What are the three issues with miracles?

A

the problem of definition; what do we mean when we use the word ‘miracle’
the issue of whether miracles actually happen or whether it is reasonable to believe in miracles
the implications of the idea of miracle for an understanding of the nature of God

192
Q

What does God say to Job which suggests he is a creator?

A

Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements – surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone?”
Job 38:4-6

193
Q

What is the problem of evil even in light of the fall of man story?

A

F.D.E. Schleiermacher argued that evil could not have created itself out of ex nihilno from a perfect world. Either the world was created perfect and God let it go wrong, or the world was created imperfect and evil and suffering already existed. In both cases, God can be held responsible for evil and suffering.

194
Q

In what way is God concerned with the individual?

A

It is God’s love that demands people to become the best they have the potential to be by obeying his commands as they are revealed. Therefore God’s goodness is concerned with individual people, not like the universal form of good.

195
Q

How is the Judea-Christian God’s relationship with humanity differ from Aristotle’s prime mover?

A

God does not just think about himself but purposefully calls the world into existence desiring a loving relationship with creation, a relationship that works both ways. This is very unlike the Aristotelian concept of a Prime Mover who does not know that the universe exists because the only subject that is worthy of thought is himself.

196
Q

What are some quotes from the Psalms that suggest God is the creator?

A

The heaven’s declare the glory of God, the vault of heaven proclaim his handiwork; day discourses of it to day, night to night hands on the knowledge. -Ps 19:1-2
Yahweh, what variety you have created, arranging everything so wisely! Earth is completely full of things you have made.
Ps 104:24

197
Q

What do the two creation stories suggest?

A

both stories strongly suggest the world was created for humanity, not that people happened by accident or chance once the evolutionary process had been set in motion.

198
Q

What does Teleological mean?

A

Teleology is concerned with the final end or purpose of something. The ‘telos’ of an object is part of the object itself, it is intrinsic.

199
Q

How would the Prime Mover cause movement?

A

It does not start off the movement by giving it some kind of push, but it is the purpose, or end, or the teleology, of the movement. This is important for Aristotle, because he thought that an effective cause, giving a push, would be affected itself by the act of pushing. Aristotle believed the prime mover causes things to move by attraction . God draws things to himself and remains unaffected. The stars and the planets move out of a spiritual desire to imitate God. They do this by moving in eternal circles.

200
Q

What does prime matter mean?

A

Prime Matter refers to anything that lacks a well defined form – not organised in any particular structure. It has matter but no form.

201
Q

What are the strengths of the Four Causes?

A

Based on empirical knowledge- we can observe it ourselves.
Can readily be applied to things in the world as a way of explaining them.
Allows us to consider why something exists, and it’s purpose, which can be used to suggest the universe has a purpose
Some of causes are easy to prove- more so than the theory of the Forms

202
Q

What is the Final Cause?

A

The reason for its existence. This is the most important aspect of Aristotle’s thinking. The final cause of a statue is the desire of the sculptor to make a decorative or commemorative beautiful object.
It asks the question: What is it for?

203
Q

Why is movement considered eternal and what does Aristotle say about this?

A

The concept of movement or change is eternal - there cannot be a first or last change. For example, we can observe movement in ‘the heavens’ (in space) with no apparent beginning or end. Aristotle argued that this eternal movement points to a mover that does not move itself. It cannot be the efficient cause of movement because an efficient causer would move itself. Thus Aristotle argues that the unmoved mover or Prime Mover must be a final cause.

204
Q

What does God do?

A

the activity of the Prime Mover, God, must be purely spiritual and intellectual. The activity of God is thought. God could not think about anything which caused him to change in any way; nothing which could affect him, or react, or even change him from not-knowing to knowing. Aristotle concludes that God thinks about himself only. Nothing else is a fit subject. He even defines God as ‘thought of thought’, or ‘thinking about thinking’. At the end of this line of argument, Aristotle comes to the conclusion that God knows only himself

205
Q

What is the final cause of movement?

A

For Aristotle, the final cause of movement is a love and desire for God. God is perfection, everything wants to imitate perfection, and therefore everyone is drawn to it – creating movement without moving itself.

206
Q

Why is the Prime Mover necessary?

A

Everything in the world in in flux- it is transient. But something needed to start the movement, without itself moving. This thing would be the prime mover.

207
Q

What is God as the prime mover like?

A

God exists necessarily – he does not depend on anything else for his existence, and cannot be thought of as not existing. He never changes or has the potential to change, he is eternal. Since God cannot create movement by physical means, he must instead create movement by drawing things to himself.

208
Q

What is good?

A

Something is good if it achieves its end purpose, and its telos defines its good. Aristotle said that if it were possible to discover the telos of an organism, it would be possible to determine what needs to be done to reach that end.

209
Q

What are the weaknesses of the Four Causes?

A

Plato would argue that empirical knowledge is flawed.
Final Causes aren’t needed to explain objects- Richard Dawkins doesn’t believe in a final cause.
It only works if there is indeed an end purpose, but some people reject that.
Could be said that some objects can not be explained by 4 causes- a flash lightning ect.
Difficult to apply to humans, and concepts and intangible things such as emotions
Does cancer have a purpose which makes it good?

210
Q

What is the material cause?

A

What the object is made of. The material cause of a statue would be gold or bronze, for a chair it would be wood.
It asks the question: What is it made of?

211
Q

What are the weaknesses of Aristotle’s prime mover?

A

Aristotle argues the prime mover can’t
be changed and then suggests that reason can join the pure thought of theprime mover but this doesn’t make sense as it would surely change.
He doesn’t really explain what the prime mover is or where it comes from.
 The senses can be fooled –
can theyreally give us knowledge?
 How can the prime mover not be involved in the world and yet still help
things achieve their purpose. It wouldn’t
be up to date.
 Doesn’t fit in with the concept of God having a relationship with humans.
If the prime mover is eternal thought, where did the matter that the world is made of come from?
Why does the universe need to have a reason for existence?

212
Q

What is the Formal cause?

A

The characteristics of the object. The person or mythical beast that the statue resembles. The statue is not just a lump of marble someone is chiseling away at.
It asks the question: What are its characteristics?

213
Q

What are the four causes?

A

Material cause
Efficient Cause
Formal Cause
Final Cause

214
Q

How did Aristotle differ from Plato?

A

Unlike Plato, Aristotle did not believe there are two separate realms. He believed the world we live in is the only place in which we can have true knowledge, because it is through our sense experience that we come to understand things. Aristotle believed that ‘form’ was not an ideal, but found within the item itself. The form is its structure and characteristics and can be perceived using the senses.

215
Q

What is the world and what did this lead to Aristotle saying?

A

It is transient- in a state on constant movement. Aristotle posits that all movement (not just motion but all kinds of change) must have a mover

216
Q

What is the Efficient Cause?

A

The agent that brings something about. In the case of a statue the act of chiseling is the efficient cause, as is the sculpture.
It asks the question: How did it happen?

217
Q

What sort of argument is Aristotle’s theory of the causes?

A

Teleological

218
Q

What are the strengths of the Prime Mover argument?

A

It has parallels to God, so is readily accepted by people of judea-christian faith.
It is logical to believe that there has to be a start point
Based on then principle of cause and effect, which we can observe.
The prime mover helps explain how everything achieves its purpose
It could fit in with the big bang theory

219
Q

Why must God never be immaterial and eternal?

A

Eternal things must be good; there can be no defect in something that exists necessarily, because badness is connected with some kind of lack, a not-being of something which ought to be there, an absence of the ‘actuality’ that Aristotle thought God most perfectly has. It could not be made of any kind of stuff, because matter is capable of being acted upon, it has potential to change.

220
Q

How does Aristotle perceive God?

A

God is the only thing that has form without matter

221
Q

Why must the Prime mover be outside of space and time?

A

Because otherwise, there would need to be something that started the prime mover, and something that happened before it existed which would lead to infinite regression.

222
Q

What does Plato say is the real world?

A

Plato suggests that the world we live in is a world of appearances but the real world is a world of ideas that he calls Forms.

223
Q

What was the thinking behind the forms?

A

Plato believed that what we can see around us is a world of appearances, the material world.
He asks, what does it mean to be a tree or an animal?
In the material world, things like trees and plants and animals will all die out
The world of Forms, Plato suggests, holds the true Form of everything in our world and these cannot die

224
Q

What are the two worlds?

A

For Plato there are two words; the eternal world and the material world. The eternal world possesses the object of knowledge and is more real than the material world which possesses the object of opinion.

225
Q

What is it like in the cave?

A

Some prisoners are trapped in a cave, away from a “real life.” The prisoners are chained and only able to look straight ahead at a wall in front of them, whilst there is a fire behind them. Between them and the fire is a kind of track with a parapet in front of it, rather like the stage of a puppet show.

226
Q

What forms was Plato concerned with?

A

he was concerned with the ideal Forms of concepts such as Beauty, Truth, Justice and the Good

227
Q

What does the escaped prisoner represent?

A

He is the philosopher who wants to know what is really going on.

228
Q

How do the forms translate to physical objects?

A

Forms give physical objects what reality they have because of their resemblance.

229
Q

What does the journey out of the cave say?

A

That only people escaping the artificial world of the senses, containing shadows, echoes and guesswork, can know the truth. The painful realisation that what we have taken for granted is not reality

230
Q

How does Plato distinguish between knowledge and opinion?

A

For Plato, knowledge gained through the senses (empirical experience) is no more than opinion. Knowledge gained through philosophical reasoning is certain.

231
Q

What is the most important form?

A

The most important form is the Form of the Good. In the material world we can label things as good, but this does not tell us what goodness is.

232
Q

What is the world of forms?

A

Plato says that there must be somewhere where these Forms exist
As a form is unchanging as it is not a physical object and it can never die, so it cannot be in the material world
Plato suggests that in our world there are only shadows and images of the Forms
When we are born, we have some recollection of what the Forms are – he suggests evidence for this is that we all have a basic understanding of what beauty is without being taught it
However, through our lives we lose the idea of the True forms

233
Q

Who does Plato think is the best leader?

A

In Plato’s idea world, society is led by the philosopher who has no distractions such as a family or material possessions to divert them from the correct way forward.

234
Q

Why is it impossible to know reality from the material world?

A

The material world when it is in a constant state of flux and therefore it is impossible to know the truth of reality - “You cannot step into the same river twice”

235
Q

Where do the shadows and echoes come from?

A

People can carry a variety of artificial objects made from wood and stone along the track making them move and sometimes giving them voices – like the puppeteers of a puppet show Shadows of the puppets are cast up on the wall in front of the prisoners caused by the fire. Since the wall is the only thing the prisoners have ever known, they are lead to believe that these shadows are entities in themselves and the only reality. Due to the flickering fire the shadows are poor quality and are merely images of artificial objects imitating real objects that exact in a reality the prisoners are not aware of. The prisoners experience echoes of the puppeteers pretending to be the artificial objects

236
Q

What is Plato showing with the allegory of the cave?

A

To show the importance of questioning everything like a philosopher does in order to distinguish between the unreal physical world and the spiritual world lit by the sun. He is highlighting that empiracal knowledge is flawed.

237
Q

What does the outside world represent?

A

Truth and reality - knowledge for Plato resides in the world of the forms. The real world in Plato’s Cave Allegory corresponds to the world of the Forms.

238
Q

What happens when one of the prisoners escape?

A

Plato explains a series of events in which one prisoner is set free. He can stand up and turn around – finds movement painful at first, and is too dazzled by the light form the fire to see anything properly. As he becomes used to the light he realizes that his former view of reality was not accurate. Looking at the fire makes him uncomfortable and he wants to go back to looking back at the shadows again, when he was happy with his interpretation of the world. However he is forced outside in what Plato describes as a steep and rough journey. He as so dazzled by the sun at first he cannot see anything. However, the more his eyes get used to the world outside the cave the more he is able to perceive. He is able to look into the sky at nighttime first and then eventually at daytime. He begins to understand that the world depends on the sun for existence, the source of all light, reflections and shadows.

239
Q

Why does the theory of the forms suggest evidence for immortal life?

A

We have concepts of the perfect forms thus our souls must have known them before we were born (innate, ‘a priori’ knowledge) –evidence that we have immortal souls.

240
Q

What are the strengths of Plato’s forms?

A

It explains why we all recognise the same essential elements in something
This argument helps us to understand why there are imperfections in the world around us.
It encourages us to question in order to learn and to not accept things at face value.
Brian Davies would argue that without Forms we would not be able to discuss, argue, agree or disagree on ‘general features of the real world’, such as ‘beauty’ or justice’, because we would have no knowledge or recognition of what these

241
Q

What does the game represent?

A

The Game represents how people believe that one person can be a ‘master’ when they have knowledge of the empirical world. Plato is demonstrating that this master does not actually know any truth, and suggesting that it is ridiculous to admire someone like this.

242
Q

What do the shadows represent?

A

The shadows on the wall represent an illusion of reality that the people viewing the wall try to interpret without understanding the truth; that the shadows are only shadows.

243
Q

What is the allegory of the cave designed to make a contrast between?

A

between people who see only appearances and mistake them for the truth, and those who really do see the truth.

244
Q

What is a form?

A

A Form is the idea about what a thing is
For example, there are many types of trees but when we think of a tree there are certain characteristics we assign to it – it has branches, it has leaves etc.
So, there must be an ideal tree in the world of forms. An ideal, which every other tree imitates.

245
Q

How does the theory of the forms link to the allegory of the cave?

A

The trapped prisoners represent the regular people who can only see the shadows of the true forms
The escaped prisoner represents the Philosopher who is trying to reach the world of Forms
The outside world represents the world of Forms, where the true form of beauty lies
The sun represents the form of the Good, as it is the source of all other forms.

246
Q

What happens when the former prisoner returns?

A

The escapee or former prisoner feels sorry for others in cave, goes down to tell them. His ability to see the shadows on the wall has deteriorated since his sight has been adjusted to the sunlight of the outside world. The other prisoners laugh at him and say his journey into the light was a waste of time because it spoiled his ability to see clearly. They threaten to kill anyone who attempts to set them free.

247
Q

What are the criticisms with the allegory of the cave?

A

There is no concrete proof that either the world outside or inside the cave is real, so how are we to know which is the true world?
Aristotle criticized Plato’s argument in his book Nicomachean ethics as he did not agree that the form of something has a separate existence over and above that particular.
Belief that only an elite can work out reality and have to go through mathematical and lose grip on everyday life to do it may be wrong.
His view of a philosopher ruling may overlook practical skills needed for ruling.
The Allegory is only valid if the World of forms is true, for which we have no proof.
Seems to underestimate the pull of emotions, desires etc. by saying the prisoner had no desire to return to the cave.
Gloomy cave does not represent the material world which can be beautiful
fails to make the distinction between the visible world and the WoF because the analogy contains physical objects.
Over-simplify and over-contrast the ordinary person and the philosopher.

248
Q

What is the hierarchy of the forms?

A
The Good
Universal Qualities (Justice, Truth, beauty)
Concepts and Ideals
Physical Living objects
Physical inanimate objects
249
Q

Why is the Form of the Good the most important form?

A

Because, once you understand the Good, it will enable you to understand other Forms such as Justice and Beauty, because they are all aspects of goodness. The Good illuminates everything else, the further away from the good you get, the paler things become.

250
Q

What is represented by the prisoners not wanting to break free?

A

The other prisoners reaction to the escapee returning represents that people are scared of knowing philosophical truths and do not trust philosophers. Could link to his teacher- socrates- who was condemned to death. The unwillingness of the majority to have their views challenged. We would rather believe in things that are un real because it is more comfortable.

251
Q

What are the weaknesses of Plato’s Forms?

A

You can’t prove that the world of forms exist.
Infinite regression- if you can have a form of a form, why can’t you have a form of a form of a form…
People can argue that good is subjective, and no two people will come to the same conclusion about what is good.
It is unlikely that everything has an ideal form (cancer cells for example)
It does not help us make sense of the world we live in
Undermines our need for sense
Plato is unclear about how the world of Forms relates to our world.
Ideals change from culture and time- no true form.

252
Q

How did he link the concept of beauty to a form?

A

He observed that the term beauty may be applied to different objects and people.
However, there are many types of beauty
Plato suggests that underlying all of these is the real Form of beauty
And some part of the idea of beauty is imitated by all the different beautiful things.

253
Q

What does the cave represent?

A

The cave shows that believers of empirical knowledge are trapped in a ‘cave’ of misunderstanding.

254
Q

What does the sun represent?

A

The form of the good and philosophical truth and knowledge. It can never be directly observed but allows illumination of other things

255
Q

What is Eikasia and how does it relate to the cave?

A

Eikasia is the state of mind Plato refers to when discussing the prisoners in the cave – the lowest level of understanding

256
Q

What is the game that the prisoners come up with?

A

Plato suggested prisoners may have made up a game where they observe shadows passing by and remember their order of appearance so can make good guesses about which object will come next. This requires no philosophical insight, just a skill at guesswork. A person with real knowledge will understand that this skill has no value compared with a genuine understanding of reality – the world outside of the cave.

257
Q

What do the prisoners represent?

A

They are people who just accept everything at face value and never ask questions or try to understand, therefore meaking their lives empty and meaningless.

Decks in From Flashcardlet Class (66):