paper 1

• paleys design argument uses a-posteriori knowledge = based on the experience = in particular for paley of 3 observations = complexity, regularity and purpose
• through these a-posteriori observations paley concludes that some objects in the world show clear evidence they are designed as they have the observed complexity, regularity and purpose = so it is likely it was designed by an intelligent designer.
• paley uses a watch analogy in his design argument = walking across a heath and come across a stone and a watch = we can observe the watch has complexity, regularity and purpose = must have been designed by a watchmaker = the universe has complexity, regularity and purpose = must have been designed by a designer = "that person is god" (natural theology ch. 24)
• the design argument is an inductive argument meaning the premises supply strong evidence for the conclusion
• the design argument is not a proof as an inductive argument is not a guarantee of the truth as evidence could be discovered to prove it wrong
• paley supports faith with reason and observation and goes against the view that faith in god is unreasonable
• fideism = faith provides rare certainty and passion = not right to use reason to explain faith
• h.h price distinguishes between belief that which is the acceptance of propositions and belief in which is commitment and trust
• humes criticisms were published before the design argument but can still be applied
• hume criticises the design argument that
• humes criticisms of the design argument

  • multiple designers? = a watch and its parts can be made by more than one designer
  • limited designer = designer doesn't have gods characteristics as evil is present
  • anthropomorphism = human attributes to a non human entity and epistemic distance makes it hard to understand = analogy becomes weaker as objects become less similar eg watch and universe
  • epicurean hypothesis = atoms in infinite time will eventually reach an ordered state
• strengths of the design argument

  • paley argues that evil is unavoidable for good = hicks soul making theodicy = we need evil to appreciate good
  • swinburnes occums razor = simplest explanation is the best = why have multiple designers
  • despite anthropomorphic language paley still recognises gods transcendence
• the ontological argument uses a-priori knowledge = prior to empirical experience
• the ontological argument is a deductive argument meaning if the premises are true then the conclusion must be = status as proof as if evidence is accepted its a guaranteed truth = but wants objections make this unlikely
• karl barth argued the ontological argument is a proof in the sense that it is accepted in religion
• anselms argument is that in proslogium he defines god as 'a being that which no greater can be conceived' = even a fool can understand this in his mind = in order to be the greatest conceivable being god must exist in Bothe reality and the mind
• Anselm uses the painter analogy in his ontological argument = it is greater for a painting to exist both in the mind and in reality than just in the mind
• gaunilo uses his argument on behalf of the fool - reductio ad absurdum = argue to the absurd to disprove = it is possible to imagine the greatest island = it is greater to exist on reality and the mind = greatest island must exist =but it doesn't
• anselms response to gaunilo = a perfect island must be that than which no greater can be conceived = island must exist necessarily to be greatest = island are contingent so the logic cannot be applied like it is to god
• strengths of the ontological argument

  • deductive so if premises are true it is a proof
  • karl Barth - argument succeeds because its not a logical proof but a confession of faith
• value for religious faith = an atheist cannot understand the true concept of god (proslogium 4)
• kants criticisms of the ontological argument

  • existence is not a predicate = adds nothing to the concept of the subject = imagine a coin = brown changes it but existence doesn't
  • a predicate us not a guarantee = a unicorn is a horse with a horn = doesn't exist
• the cosmological argument is inductive = premises supply strong evidence for conclusion
• status as proof = evidence is not a guarantee = Hughes says we should redefine proof as an overwhelming probability
• the cosmological argument uses a-posteriori knowledge = after experience
• cosmological argument = aquinas summa theologica = third way = all things we see in the universe are contingent = cause "possible to be or not to be'' = then at some point there was nothing = but nothing can come from nothing so there must be a necessary being = exists on its own = cannot be an infinite regression
• russels cosmological critisisms =

  • universe existing is a brute fact = no explanation = but aquinas argues science works in the universe that there are no brute facts so why would the universe be one
  • fallacy of composition = failure in reasoning eg H isn't wet, O isn't wet so H20 isn't wet = assumes what's true for the parts is true for the whole = everything in the universe has a cause so the universe must = Russel argues this is a fallacy of composition and the universe is necessary but aquinas disagrees and says this is not always a fallacy - the bricks are brown so the wall must be brown
• humes cosmological criticisims

  • universe itself may be necessary = occumz razor = simplistically answer the best = why involve god
  • phrase necessary being is meaningless = god exists is a synthetic statement = can only be true by experience so not logically necessary = aquinas response by saying it is metaphysically necessary = party of how things really are
• moral evil = committed by human beings eg rape

  natural evil = what the world does to us eg. flood
• the logical problem of evil = inconsistent triad = god is omnipotent and omniscient yet evil exists

  responses = free will defence and hicks eschatological solution
• evidential problem of evil = overwhelming and pointless evil = god is omniscient so is aware of the quantity and quality of evil
• response to problem of evil = the free will defence = aims to prove it is not possible to have free will without moral evil and it is worth it
• John Mackie free will defence = logically possible for a person to make free good choices all the time = why didn't god do this = he doesn't exist

  • 1st order good = happiness and pleasure // 2nd order good = sadness and pain
  • 2nd order good = sympathy to 1st // 2nd order evil = selfish to first
  • 3rd order good = freedom gives 2nd
  • 4th order good = god gives 3rd
• platinga response to the free will defence = god allows evil for two morally sufficient reasons =

  • natural evil = entered world due to the original sin
  • moral evil = creates 3 possible scenarios = can't have liberation free will without ability to choose evil = logically inconsistent
• hicks soul making theodicy = humans are made in the image of god and move towards the likeness of god via suffering = must use our free will to do good so need epistemic distance
• hick believes in universal salvation = god is omni-benevolent and wouldnt let anyone go to hell
• weaknesses of hicks soul making theodicy = doesn't account for animal suffering, ends don't justify means, doesn't match some christian teachings eg Jesus crusifiction
• Griffiths process theology = rejects creatio ex nihilo = universe and god exists panetheistically = within each other = like body and mind = therefore as there is suffering in the universe its also in god = god created the world out of pre existing matter so god is not omnipotent = cannot get rid of evil
• strengths of Griffiths process theology = shows sense of realism about god, idea that god relates to our suffering

  weaknesses = removes one of gods main qualities, should god have brought about a world with uncontrollable evil
• the three types of visions are

  • corporeal - empirical evidence eg Bernadette saw Mary at Lourdes
  • imaginative - through the 'eye of the mind' eg pharos dream
  • intellectual - no image but illuminates the soul eg st teresa feeling Jesus presence