Spring 2011 Philosophy of Human Nature Lecture Notes 3

3/31/2011

• Introduction to topics in Philosophy of Religion Unit
• Reminder of Logos/Theos/Mythos model
• Major Questions guiding inquiry

• What is the best way for philosophy to support religious experience through Logos?
• What should religious and non-religoius peple expect to see when they look at each other? What account should they give of each other's beliefs?

Work on Proofs for the Existence of God

1. Argument from Experience

advantages of working from experience.

major problems: diversity of experiences, lack of experience, non-verifiability of experience, sensitivity of experience to upbringing

strong thesis vs. weaker thesis: Experience of God demonstrates. . . vs. Religious experience suggests. . .

notice in relation to epistemology, God and JFK.

2. Cosmological Argument

Basic Form:

P1: If there is no God, there is no world.

P2: There is a world.

C: There is a God.

principle of sufficient reason - for everything that exists there must be an explanation of why it exists.

major objection to framework of the argument: modern critique of use of principle of s.r., Russell/Copleston, p. 186 R1

but, grant that, then there might be 3 options for explanation of cosmos:

1. Cosmos always existed (maybe Bang/Crunch)

but there are no actual infinities, are there? example of person actually counting to or from infinity.

Is it explanatory?

2. Cosmos begins with Singularity (Big Bang)

Uncaused events. Example of the moment of loss of the neutron from a decaying uranium sample.

Why prefer God to a random event?

Oddness of saying that the entire universe is an uncaused event.

Contingent being / necessary being.

3. God explains Cosmos

only a necessary being can explain the existence of the universe in a non-random way.

God is that necessary being.

3. Design Arguments

Found object arguments. Paley's watch, memory chip. Counter arguments?

Can natural science explain the accumulation of design? metaphors of design in biology.

Mind first vs. Mind last

Consider diverse possibilities for explaining the apparent accumulation of order and design.

Traditional Creationism: Faith based arguments, arguments from ignorance, attacks on science.

Naturalistic Explanations (including Theory of Evolution): incomplete at this point on questions of origin of life.

Intelligent Design Creationism: having both explanations: Hoyle on probability. argument against this (193)

Ockham's Razor

4/5/2011

More Proofs for the Existence of God

4. Ontological Arguments

Basic Form:

P1: Either God exists or he doesn't.

P2: The claim that God does not exist is contradictory.

C: God exists.

Denial of God's existence entails a contradiction.

greatest possible .... plus existence? The greatest being you can think of must exist? Try to deny it and you wind up saying, "It is possible to think of something greater than the greatest being that one can think of"

Kant's argument against treating existence as a predicate (R1 p. 198). Not a property of a thing. example of "dream partner" 198.

Reflections on Proofs:

Are they proofs? Were they meant to be proofs or aids to reflection?

What do we mean by proof today in relation to knowledge of science? Mathematics again!

Importance of necessity in the proofs.

Small Group Discussion

Reflect on the proofs for the existence of God, first by noting aspects of the proofs that are appealing from a religious point of view. Then consider some of the problems philosophers find with the proofs. Broaden your discussion by considering what role "demonstration" or "evidence" plays in religious life for you or your generation. Do believers still have the same

The Problem of Evil

Pattern Argument for the Logical Problem of Evil

Problem for faiths in which God is omnipotent and wholly good.

1. Every good being tries everything in its power to prevent innocent

beings from suffering unnecessary evil.

2. If God exists, and if God is all-good, omniscient, and omnipotent, then innocent beings should not suffer from unnecessary evils (like land mines, diseases, or starvation).

3. But they do suffer from these evils.

C: Either God does not exist or he is not a wholly good being.

-the free will argument in response.

Pattern Argument for the Evidentiary problem of Evil

1. (concession) God's existence is compatible with unnecessary suffering.

2. The existence, kinds, and amounts of suffering in the world make the existence of (or our idea of) God highly implausible.

C: Either God does not exist or hi is not a wholly good being.

4/7/2011

Faith and Rationality

• Meanings of terms: rationalism / faith / fideism

• Does "faith" underlie science? pro: faith in senses, faith in uniformity of nature. con: distinction between acknowledging limits of realism and actively believing in an entity without or against evidence to the contrary.

Flew, "Theology and Falsification"

• Flew -- the view from the secular modern scientific perspective.

• parable of the gardener -- qualifications
• "God has a plan" looks like an assertion, but might not be.

Framing the Discussion of Religious Truth

Notice how 'yes' and 'no' answers to this question affect the epistemological "stakes" of the discussion of the nature of religious belief, and, in turn, of the theories available to the F and NF.

Is relgious belief founded on the same assumptions, rules of evidence, and evidence as beliefs we consider "objective"?
YES - Theos involves belief in the reality of God as a being, as an entity.	NO - The reality of theos may not be disclosed through object-oriented methods of empirical objective knowledge.
Person of Faith commits to either rational theology or "god of the gaps" view	Person of Faith might claim that relgion works more by rules of relationship. Can't ask for evidence of love prior to relationship. Still, relationships are a way of knowing. Religious faith might open up a reality in a similar way as "love" opens up a reality.
Person wo/ Faith can make a very strong case that there's not much objective evidence of God, especially using scientific methods. If God's reality is assessed by the same criteria we would assess the reality of a force or particle, theories with God in them wouldn't be contenders.	Person wo/Faith - Fs relate to something they believe to be divine, but they acknowledge is not discoverable by objective means, but rather through faith experience.