Date post: | 04-Apr-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | bradford-mccall |
View: | 226 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 52
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
1/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
2/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
THINKING PHILOSOPICALLY
What Are Your Religious Beliefs?
What is your definition of religion? What do you think is the purpose of religion?
How would you describe your religious beliefs? Do they include a belief in God?If so, describe your concept of God.
What was the origin of your religious beliefs (or lack of religious beliefs)? If your
beliefs are different from those you were raised with, explain what caused you tochange your religious views.
What religious activities do you engage in (for example, worship, prayer,meditation, communion, singing, chanting, liturgy)?
Describe the role that religious leaders and holy books play in your religion.
Describe some of the symbols and myths of your religion.
How does your religion view other religions?
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
3/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
FEUERBACH AND MARX ON RELIGION
LUDWIG FEUERBACH
Through feeling, human beings worship their own positive traits writ large as God.
KARL MARX
Religion is the opiate of the masses.
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
4/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
HINDUISM AND BUDDHISM
HINDUISM: FIVE THEMES
Contemplation of the Luminous Self
Reincarnation
Karma
Yogic Practices
Five Sacrifices
BUDDHISM: FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS
Life inevitably involves suffering, is
imperfect and unsatisfactory
Suffering originates in our desires
Suffering will cease if all desires cease
There is a way to realize this state: the
Noble Eightfold path
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
5/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
JUDAISM, CHRISTIANITY, AND ISLAM
All are monotheistic religions
Judaism emphasizes rituals based on key historical events, such as the Exodus fromEgypt, that function as moral paradigms relevant to contemporary lives
Christianity, like Judaism, focuses on key historical events, but differs from Judaism
in its view that Jesus is the Son of God and savior whose sacrificial death andresurrection make it possible for people to have eternal life in heaven
Islam focuses on the Five Pillars
Shahadah: There is no God but Allah and Mohammad is his prophet
Salat: a regular life of prayer (prayer five times a day is required)
Zakat: a yearly setting aside of a portion of ones wealth for others Sawm: the observation of the holy month of Ramadan
Hajj: the pilgramage to Mecca required once in a Moslems life (assuming adequate health andeconomic means to make the journey)
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
6/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
READING CRITICALLY:
Analyzing the Argument forReligious Plurality
John Hicks argument for religious plurality contends that the various
religions of the world embody different responses to the ultimate divineReality. Each religion, in attempting to express the human experience of thisdivine Reality, has built its own distinctive way of thinking and experiencingthis Reality and has developed its own answers to the perennial questions ofour origin and destiny. What is your reaction to Hicks argument? Do youagree with it? Why or why not?
Hick believes that all of the major religions are based on the concept ofsalvation, moving human existence from self-centeredness to Reality-centeredness. Based on what you know of various religions, do you believethis broad and inclusive definition of salvation is accurate? Why or whynot?
Imagine yourself in the position of someone who disagrees with Hicksposition. What arguments would you make againstreligious pluralism andforthe existence of one true religion?
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
7/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Ontological Argument
The strategy is to argue that the denial of Gods
existence results in a contradiction
And so it must be the case that God does exist Reductio ad Absurdem
You want to prove that p is true so you assumenot p and show that a contradiction results.
Since not p leads to a contradiction it must bethe case that p is true
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
8/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Analogy with Shapes
How do we know that there are no squarecircles?
Maybe there is a square circle on Pluto and we just
havent discovered it
But, if there were there would have to be someobject that was both a square and a circle
Something that was and was not a square
That is a contradiction Therefore round squares dont exist
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
9/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Good Strategy
It is often claimed that belief in God is irrational
Belief in something that conflicts with science andwhich no one can see
St. Anselms argument tries to turn the table onthe atheist by arguing that it is they who havethe irrational belief
To deny that God exists is as irrational as it is to saythat square circles exist
It is to assert something contradictory
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
10/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Ontological Argument II
We can conceive of a being than whichnothing greater can be thought
We grasp the concept of perfect being as a being
which has no equal, and we see that we cannotthink of something better
We understand what it would mean for there to bea being which was the greatest possible being andwe see that we cant think of anything greater
So far we are only talking about the idea of Godin our mind, NOT an actually existing thing
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
11/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Ontological Argument III
But, Anselm continues, if it is possible for us to
conceive of such a being then that being must
exist
For, assume that the contrary is true,
Then it would be the case that I have the idea of abeing than which nothing greater can be thought(i.e. I am thinking about the greatest thing that I
can think of) And yet there were no such being in reality
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
12/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Ontological Argument IV
That would mean that I am at the same time
both
thinking of a being than which none greater can
be conceived (i.e. I am thinking about God)
and not thinking of a being than which nonegreater can be conceived (since I can think of agreater being: namely one who exists)
Which is a contradiction; so God must exist
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
13/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
A Reply on Behalf of the Fool
I can think of an island which is the greatest I canconceive
So it to must exist or else I am caught in the samecontradiction
I am thinking of the greatest island I can conceiveof
And not thinking of the greatest island that I canconceive of
So the island must exist
But this is silly! So the original argument must betoo
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
14/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
St. Anselms Reply
I can conceive of the perfect island not existing
Because the perfect island, no matter how
great, is not the greatest thing that I can think of
Yet, the argument is only supposed to work forthings which I cant think of something greater
In other words, I can always think of a greater
island than which ever one we happen to bethinking about but I cant think of a greaterbeing than God
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
15/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Kants Response
Consider the sentence Cats are brown
Cats is the subject
brown is the predicate
George is a cat
cat is the predicate
A predicate names a property
brown names the property of being brown
cat names the property of being a cat
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
16/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Kants Response II
A predicate names a property that an objectmay or may not have
A cat may or may not be brown
An object may or may not be a cat
Now what about the sentence God exists?
It looks like exists is a predicate
It looks like it stands for a property, like cat orbrown
This it is because it is grammatically the same
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
17/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Kants Response III
But it isnt logically a predicate
If it were it would name a property
That an object may or may not have
If it were then it would have to be the case thatsome object, say a cat, could lack the propertyof existence
But that is absurd
What could it mean to say that there was someobject (that exists) which lacked existence?
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
18/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Kants Response IV
If existence were a property then it would be
impossible to say that anything did not exist
Consider Smurfs do not exist
For this sentence to be true it would have to be thecase that there was an object which was a smurfand which lacked the property of existence
Just like to say that the table is not blue is to saythat there is an object which is a table and lacksthe property of being blue
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
19/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Kants Response V
The problem with Anselms argument, then, isthat it treats existence as a predicate
It assumes that existence is something that an
object can have (or lack) And since God is thought of as having everything
He must have existence (or else He wont be thegreatest)
But existence doesnt name a property It is not something that we can add to an object to
make it better
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
20/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Kant VI
So what is existence? Predicates are contrasted with quantifiers
A quantifier tells you how many of a thing youhave some, none, all, every, many, most, one,
two, no one, somebody, a lot, etc
Existence is not a predicate, it is a
quantifier It tells you how many of something there is
at least one
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
21/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Kants Response VII
So to say that God doesnt exist is to answer thequestion how many Gods?
With none
So to deny Gods existence is not contradictory
Instead of both thinking and not thinking of anobject that has maximum greatness
We are thinking there are no objects with
maximum greatness
A G C CA
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
22/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
READING CRITICALLY:
Analyzing the Ontological Argument
Describe in your own words Anselmsontological argument for the existenceof God. If you did not believe in God,or if your belief in God was shaky,would this argument help convince
you that there is indeed a supremebeing whom we have traditionallycalled God? Why or why not?
Describe in your own words Gauniloscritique of Anselms ontologicalargument for the existence of God. Doyou find Gaunilos reasoningpersuasive? Why or why not?
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
23/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
A Posteriori Arguments
We have so far been looking at an a prioriargument for the existence of God The ontological argument relies only on the kind of
being God is and concludes that He must exist
We will now turn to looking at a posterioriarguments These kind of arguments all start with some fact
about the world And conclude that God must exist in order to
explain the fact
Two major kinds of a posteriori arguments The Cosmological The Teleological
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
24/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Teleological Argument
Commonly called the Argument fromDesign From Greek telos meaning end, purpose or
goal
It starts from the observation that the world looksdesigned and concludes that there is a designer
A version of this argument is given asAquinass fifth way
His version focuses on the design of the universe The modern version focuses on the design of living
organisms
We will come back to this argument
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
25/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Cosmological Argument
Takes its name from the Greek cosmos Which means orderly system Starts from the observation that things come
into existence, undergo change, and ceaseto exist
These kind of arguments all have theirorigins in Aristotle He gave these arguments for the conclusion
that the cosmos (world) always existed These arguments are taken over by early
Muslim philosophers and then find their way into Western
philosophy via Aquinas
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
26/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Five Ways
St. Aquinas gives five proofs for the existenceof God The Argument from Motion
The argument from Efficient Causation The Argument from Possibility and Necessity
The Argument from Degrees of Perfection
The Argument from the Governance of the World
The first three are the traditionalcosmological arguments and the last is ateleological argument (all from Aristotle) The fourth is an argument similar to the kind that
Plato gave for the existence of the forms
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
27/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Argument from Motion
When Aquinas says moved he meanschanged So change in location (what we would call
motion) is one kind of movement
But so also is a piece of wood burning, a leafturning brown etc.
Based on Aristotles theory of change Any instance of change is some potential quality
that the object has becoming actual So when the wood is not on fire it is potentially hot
In order to become actually hot the wood must bebrought into contact with something that is itselfactually hot
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
28/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Four Causes
Also based on Aristotles theory of the fourcauses Efficient- the agent that makes something Formal- the essence of the thing Material- the material it is made of Final- the reason that the thing is made
The wood becoming hot is explained as thematerial (wood) coming to posses a new form(the form of heat)
Only something which already possessed theform could transmit it to receptive material
So, a match can light the wood on fire But something had to make the match hot, and so
on
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
29/52
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
30/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Objections
Maybe there is a first cause But why think that its God?
If the argument works it shows that there
must have been a first cause Why not the Big Bang? Or an all-powerful evilbeing? Or an all-powerful stupid being? Or 20gods working together?
Why think there has to be a first cause? Maybe there is just an infinite series of causes
going back forever There is always some preceding cause so you cant take away the first cause
(because there isnt one)
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
31/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
No First Cause
A
1
A
2
A
4
A
n
A
3
A
1
A
2
A
n
A
0
A-
1
A-n
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
32/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Argument from Possibility and
Necessity Possible being=a being that can exist or not exist The technical term for this is contingent
Contingent beings are things like you, me, this room,your book, etc.
We know that these things exist contingently becausewe see things that are created and destroyed
A Necessary being is one that has to exist It is not possible for it not to exist
A necessary being cannot be created or destroyed It always exists
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
33/52
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
34/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Possibility and Necessity II
Can every being be a contingent being?
If a being is a contingent being then there was atime at which they did not exist
So, if every being were a contingent being therewould be a time at which nothing existed
But if there were a time when nothing existedthen this would be a time at which nothingexisted You cant get something from nothing
So, since something exists now not every being isa contingent being But if not every being is contingent then one is
necessary
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
35/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Objections
Same as before Maybe there is a necessary being, maybe it is
matter, or the universe One unexplainable fact is as good as another
Why think there has to be a necessarybeing Maybe there is just an infinite chain of
contingent beings going back forever
There is no time at which nothing exists There is always a contingent being around tocreate more contingent beings and eachcontingent being has one that precedes it
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
36/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Argument from the
Governance of the World Sometimes called the argument from design
There is a modern version of this argumentgiven by Paley that focuses on the design of
animals and Humans But Aquinas version of it depends on the
fact that there seems to be purpose in theuniverse Plants follow the sun during the course of the day
This is something that is in their best interest But plants dont have minds, so cant have goal-
directed behavior unless it is designed Just like inanimate objects we design
WILLIAM PALEY:
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
37/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
WILLIAM PALEY:
The Watch and the Watchmaker
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
38/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Teleological Argument
Cleanthes makes the argument in HumesDialogue The world is a giant machine We can infer by analogy that the machine had to
be designed by a mind far greater than a humanone
Philo responds that the argument fromanalogy is only as good as the analogy So, consider our going to a desert island and
seeing a watch (Paleys example) We have seen watches before and know that theydo not spontaneously arrange themselves
So we can conclude that the watch must havebeen made
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
39/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Teleological Argument II
But in the case of the universe the analogybreaks down In the first place we do not have the necessary
experience to know whether or not the universe
could spontaneously generate
In the second place we only haveexperience with a small part of the universe It is not wise to infer that the whole universe is
designed because of the way things act aroundhere
Hume make the comparison to using the growth ofhair to learn about human birth
Therefore the analogy is bad
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
40/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Teleological Argument III
But even if we were to take the analogy seriouslythere are more severe problems
A perfect God would have created a perfect
world But this world contains many imperfections, so it
follows that the designer is imperfect.
In fact this is what the analogy with humandesign really shows Humans make mistakes and design imperfect things This looks like what is going on in nature
So the analogy doesnt establish a perfect God
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
41/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Teleological Argument IV
Even if we can show that the world is perfect there isno evidence that it is due to a perfect God Analogy with human design suggests that there is usually a
long process of design and re-design where the kinks areironed out
Maybe this is just the latest in a long process of trial anderror
Finally, there is no reason to think that the designerwas just one perfect God Why not 100 gods working together
One in charge of flowers, one in charge of trees, one incharge of weeds, one in charge of beetles, etc, etc.
READING CRITICALLY:
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
42/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
READING CRITICALLY:
Analyzing the Argument from Morality
Consider your conscience or youringrained sense of morality. Do youbelieve that the existence of thisdeeply felt moral sense supportsbelief in the existence of a
supremely moral mindGod? Whyor why not?
In line with Kants reasoning, doyou believe in cosmic justice, thebelief that good people must be
rewarded with personal happiness,whether in this world or the next.Why or why not?
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
43/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL
God either cannot or will notprevent evil
If God cannot prevent evil, then
God is limited in power
If God will not prevent evil, thenGod is limited in benevolence
But if God is not limited in either
power or benevolence, why is there
evil in the world?
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
44/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Pascals Wager
Pascal starts from the assumption that wecannot rationally prove the existence ofGod All of the various proofs for the existence of God
have problems
None of them rationally compel a person tobelieve
So what should a rational person do?
Pascal argues that it is rational to believe in Godeven in the absence of a proof of his existence
It is in our best interest to believe
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
45/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Wager
God exists God does not exist
Believe
Dont
believe
Infinite
reward
Nothin
g
Nothin
g
Infinitepunishme
nt
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
46/52
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
47/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Objections
Which religion should we go and join? Christianity?
Islam?
The wager does not tell us which specificGod we should believe in A lot of gods promise punishment for non-believers
Ignores the option of agnosticism Agnostics neither believe nor disbelieve
Pascal argues that not choosing is choosing not tobelieve
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
48/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Agnostic
I dont believe there is a God canbe read two different ways
On one way of reading it, it says that I donot have a belief that God exists (nor do I
have the belief that He does not exist) On the other reading it says that I do in
fact believe that God does not exist
The difference between ~B(G) (& ~B(~G))
and
B (~G)
To refuse the wager is to choose the firstoption
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
49/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Cliffords Objection
Choosing what to believe based on which
beliefs are in your self interest is immoral
Doing so would lead to people believing all kinds
of things which would result in innocent deathsand the downfall of society
The owner of the ship knows that the
people will die, but it is in his best
interest to believe that the ship is
seaworthy
He is guilty of murder
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
50/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Cliffords Objection II
But it is worse than that
He who believes without evidence harms mankind
The danger to society is not that it should believe
wrong things, though that is great enough; but thatit should become credulous, and lose the habit oftesting things and inquiring into them; for then itmust sink back into savagery
WILLIAM JAMES
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
51/52
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
WILLIAM JAMES
Characteristics of Mystical States of Consciousness
Ineffability
Noetic quality
Transiency
Passivity
KIERKEGAARD, THE LEAP OF FAITH
7/30/2019 Chaffee, 3e Chapter 7.pptx
52/52
KIERKEGAARD, THE LEAP OF FAITH
For if God does not exist it
would of course be impossible toprove it; and if he does exist it
would be folly to attempt it.
Without risk there is no faith.