Philosophy Exam 1

Parent-Child Analogy

2yr old cries over getting vaccine and parents cannot explain to 2yr old what a vaccination is or how it is good

Behe's Biological Examples for Irreducible Complexity

Cilium, Protein Delivery Systems, Eight other examples TB pg 464

Cosmological Argument Premise 5 and another reason for rejecting (a)

Concerning anything in the universe we have no difficulty imagining that it should have never existed so we should also have no difficulty in assuming that the universe should never have existed in the first place. The Big Bang Theory supports Taylor's claim in rejecting possibility (a).

Contingency

Contingent if... -it might or might not exist -it is possible for it to not exist -if it does exist, it depends on something else for its existence -a statement is contingently true if it might have been false

Questions to Behe's Argument

Could irreducibly complex things have evolved given a lot of time? Will we get more evidence as science progresses that irreducibly complex things evolved?

The General Idea of Hicks Soul-Making Theodicy

Every evil gives us an opportunity to become better people

Inclusive Religion

Every single human being will be rewarded

Evil presents Two Main Challenges for the Theist

First: Explain why evil exists -Relevant Argument: The Logical Problem of Evil -Most common Response: Free Will Defense Second: Why certain particular instances of evil are allowed to happen if God exists -Relevant Argument: The Evidential Problem of Evil -Most common response: The Ignorance Response

Knowledge

For one to really know something, you must believe it, it must be true, and it must be justified

Central Claim of Reformed Epistemology

From a theistic perspective, it is reasonable to believe that God created us with a cognitive faculty which produces a belief in God without evidence or argument. Belief in God can be a basic belief when produced by this faculty. According to this, there is another way to form rational beliefs besides the three ways Clifford mentions.

The Teleological Argument (Basic Idea)

Nature in general seems to have been constructed with a purpose or goal in mind. This apparent order probably was brought about by an intelligent designer. Paley constructed this argument

Deism

Necessary being created the universe but is not involved at all

Necessity

Necessary if... -it must exist -it is not possible for it to not exist -things which exist necessarily depend only upon themselves for their existence -a statement is necessarily true if it is not possible for it to be false

Question to Hick: Will every instance of evil we encounter have a point and make our characters better?

No, Sometimes people ignore evil or create it.

Theism (more precisely - Monotheism)

One divine being exists who is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. This being created the universe and is still involved in the universe.

Dostoevsky's Character Ivan

Owner (torturer) releases his dogs to tear up a boy, child abuse, shooting a child from point blank (catching infants on bayonets).

Omnibenevolence

Perfectly good and perfectly loving

Objections to the Initial Conditions of the Universe version of the Teleological Argument

Perhaps other forms of life could exist in different physical conditions. R: If you change the constants no life would exist at all of any kind Multiverse: infinite number of coexisting parallel universes with varying physical constants or initial conditions With infinite universes, life will definitely exist Problem: who assigned values and generates universes?

What premise of the Evidential Problem does the Ignorance Response question?

Premise 1, there are pointless evils. It does this by saying no evil is pointless and everything is part of God's plan

Which Premise of the Evidential Problem of Evil does Peter van Inwagen question in his Judeo-Christian Approach?

Premise 2, If God exists there are no pointless evils His argument also does not coincide with the ignorance response because according to that we cannot understand Gods thinking.

Which premise of the Evidential problem of Evil does Hick reject?

Premise 2, If God exists, there are no pointless evils

Pascal's Wager (Premises and Conclusions)

Premises (1) Suppose for the sake of an argument that there is no evidence one way or the other for the claim that God exists (2) If God does exist and I believe in God, then I will receive infinite happiness (3)If God does exist and I believe that God does not exist, then I will receive infinite punishment. (4)If God does not exist and I believe in God, then I will live a finite life on this earth. In general, I might miss out on a few pleasures that I would have experienced if I were not religious. (5)If God does not exist and I believe that God does not exist, then I will live a finite life on this earth. In general, I might enjoy a few pleasures that I would not have experienced if I were religious. Conclusions (6)Therefore, if I believe in God, then either I will receive infinite happiness or miss out on a few pleasures. If I believe that God does not exist, then either I will receive infinite punishment or enjoy a few additional pleasures. (7) Therefore, given the choice between these two beliefs, I should believe that God does exist.

Reformed Epistemology (Clark)

Reformed Epistimology draws on the thoughr of John Calvin, but was developed at length only recently (1980s) by Alvin Plantinga. Clark is one of his students. Clark and Clifford have diametrically opposite views on faith.

Who supports the Teleological Argument?

Richard Taylor

Rowe's Objection to the Cosmological Argument

Rowe rejects premise one, the principle of sufficient reason. He thinks it is just an assumption and that it cannot be proven. It could be false.

Hick's problem with every evil having a point

Suffering would no longer "evoke deep personal sympathy or call forth organized relief and sacrificial help and service." He does not think every evil has a point.

Rowe's Famous Example of a Pointless Evil

Suppose in some distant forest lightning strikes a dead tree, resulting in a forest fire. In the fire a fawn is trapped, horribly burned, and lies in terrible agony for several days before death relieves its suffering. So far as we can see, the fawn's intense suffering is pointless.

Implication of Taylor's Argument for Atheism

Taylor would say that Atheism is false because the universe is contingent and something had to bring it to existence. The universe could not come to be on its own and something necessary had to perpetuate it.

Current Philosophical thinking about the Logical Problem of Evil

The argument has failed because of Free will

Arguments for the Existence of God

The cosmological argument and the teleological argument

Behe's Conclusion

The designer knew what the systems would look like when they were completed and the designer took steps to bring the systems about. Life at its most fundamental level is the product of intelligent activity.

What is wrong with an infinite series of Contingent beings?

The entire collection of contingent beings must be explained. In order for this to be adequate it would need to A. Explain the existence of each contingent being B. Explain why there are any contingent beings rather than none. Rowe defends premise 6. A necessary being must be appealed to for B.

Oscillating Big Bang Theory

The world came into existence by an explosion and it will eventually collapse back on itself to cause another big bang.

Ockham's Razor

When other things are being held equal, one should always accept the simplest theory and postulate the fewest number of things needed in order to explain something. Suggests that with Taylor's argument we should believe in only one necessary being.

Questions to the Free Will defense

Why didn't God limit us to just a few good things? R: Free will can be a great good when choices matter and make a difference in the world Can god make us do something and us still be free? R: Free will would be eliminated so no Why doesn't God correct us? R:It would not be a very pleasant world

False Belief

You belief the world is a certain way but the world is not like that. Ex. Creationists

Pascals Wager: Truth vs. Self-Interest

This argument is purely about Self-Interest because it gives no argument for whether or not God exists. It gives an argument for the greatest potential for happiness. It is in our best Self-Interest to believe that God exists according to this argument. It doesn't necessarily mean it is true.

Knowing Pascal's Wager, what if there was a God that gave infinite rewards to those who perform a great number of evils?

This is a problem for Pascal's argument but he would argue it is improbable for this type of God to exist.

The Question of Right and Wrong regarding belief

a belief being right or wrong does not concern the matter of it but the origin of a persons belief, whether he had a right to believe

Johnson's Example of a Pointless Evil

a child is trapped in a burning house and dies

the prime principle of confirmation

a general principle of reasoning which tells us when some observation counts as evidence in favor of one hypothesis over another

Theodicy

a theory trying to capture God's thinking about evil

Two Main differences of The Evidential Problem of Evil from the Logical Problem of Evil

a) Evidential problem is about pointless evils specifically; logical problem is about evil in general b) In the conclusions... Evidential: Probably God does not exist Logical: It is impossible for God to exist

Basic Beliefs

beliefs not based on arguments but rather spontaneously formed. Ex. earth is flat, sensory experiences

Example objections to the Teleological Argument given by Paley

1. We do not understand how a designer could have created the eye but without this we should not infer there is such a designer. A. We do not know the complexities of a watch but it had a maker 2. Not all nature is functioning perfectly A. Watches do not always work perfectly but they still had a maker

Leading Responses to the Evidential Problem

Ignorance Response (skeptical theism) John Hick's Soul-Making Theodicy Peter van Inwagen's Judeo-Christian Approach

Two Kinds of things discussed in Teleological Arguments

(1) Certain complex biological features of organisms (2) The initial conditions of the universe

General Structure of a Teleological Argument (modern)

(1) Consider a natural phenomenon P that exhibits great complexity and order (2) The probablility of P existing b/c of an intelligent designer who wanted it to exist is very high. (3)The possibility of P existing by mere chance is very low (4)Since P exists, it is much more probable that at least one intelligent and powerful designer wanted P to exist than it existing because of a mindless chance process

The Logical Problem of Evil

(1) Suppose that God is omnipotent (2) Suppose that God is omniscient (3) Suppose that God is omnibenevolent (4) It is impossible for a being who is "" to allow evil to exist (5)Evil does exist (6) Therefore it is impossible for God in (1) through (3) to exist

Collins Teleological Argument (formatted from general Teleological Argument)

(1)The probability of all the relevant physical constants turning out to have life permitting values assuming that they are randomly assigned is incredibly small (2)the probability of all the relevant physical constants turning out to have life permitting values assuming that at least one designer assigned these values is very high (3) Since all the relevant physical constants permit life, it is more probable that there is a designer who assigned these values

Rough Form of Paley's Argument by Analogy

(a) Consider a mechanical device like a watch. (b) Such a device exhibits a number of intricately complicated mechanisms and seems to have been created for a purpose (c) The inference, we think, is inevitable, that the watch must have had a maker (d) Consider certain parts of nature (e) if anything, they exhibit an even greater degree of complexity and seem even more to have been created for a purpose (f) Therefore, by analogy with our inference in (c), these parts of nature must have had a maker (a), (b), (d), and (e) are premises (c) and (f) are conclusions A better version of (c) and (f) is that it is highly probable that they had a maker *Paley was unaware of evolution

Two Qualifications to Dawkins' Argument

(a) Evolution does not explain the initial conditions of the universe (b) Dawkins notes that there is a lot of uncertainty with the early stages of life i.e. the origin of enzymes DNA RNA etc.

Application of the Free Will Defense to the Logical Problem of Evil

(a) Suppose that God is omnipotent (b) Suppose that God is omniscient (c) Suppose that God is omnibenevolent (d)A world with free human creatures and some evil is better than a world with no free human creatures other things being equal (e)Evil Exists According to Inwagen there is no logical inconsistency with a-c when d is added so premise four of the logical problem of evil is false. 4: It is impossible for a being of a-c to allow evil to exist

Clark's Three Reasons for his Central Claim

(a) very few people can understand many theistic arguments (b)to go through all arguments, objections, counterarguments, examples and so forth would be a lifelong endeavor. It is more plausible to think God gave us this cognitive faculty (c)Belief in God is a personal relationship, which therefore requires trust, commitment, and faith.

Other problems with the infinite series

(a)Okham's Razor (b)A Mathematical Puzzle: There is still no beginning. Infinity can never be reached. Infinity can never reach creation or 0.

Clifford's Evidentialism: If you want to be rational in believing something you must have...

(a)good arguments for the truth of what you believe (b)clear sense experience regarding whether what you believe is true (c)testimony from someone whom you have good grounds for thinking is reliable

Omniscience (two definitions)

-All-Knowing -Knows everything that is possible to know

Omnipotence (two definitions)

-The power to do anything -The power to do anything that is possible to do

Retreat Response to the Logical Problem of Evil (four options)

1) God is not omnipotent-he cannot stop evil 2)God is not omniscient- he does not know its happening so he cannot stop it 3)God is not omnibenevolent- he does not care or is all evil 4) Evil does not exist

Objections to Pascal's Wager

1) We cannot force ourselves to believe something just because it is in our Self-Interest. R:(shortened) Act as if you believe and you will eventually believe it naturally 2)If God exists, he may not look kindly on believers through Pascal's Wager because belief is based purely on Self-Interest and not faith. R: you may have started believing for Heaven but overtime you will start caring for God for other reasons.

Clark's Objections to Clifford's Evidentialism

1) We do not have time to test all our beliefs in the way that Clifford asks. And if we did follow Clifford, we would need an infinite number of arguments. (this could be saved with testimony and sense experience) 2)Clifford's standard cannot be met for many of our beliefs, such as those involving memory or other minds

Teleological Argument vs. Cosmological Argument

1)Cosmological argument states that a necessary being must exist while the Teleological argument states that a necessary being is highly probable 2)Cosmological argument does not care about complexity it only needs a contingent universe while the Teleological argument needs there to be complexity in the Universe.

What does Taylor's Argument not show?

1)Does not show Monotheism 2)Does not tell us the number of necessary beings

Criticisms to premise 4 of Cosmological Argument

1)Fourth possibility 2)Plausible 3)No necessary being

Responses of Lycan and Schlesinger

1)Most evidence for Western theistic religions so choose one of those 2)to choose a religion continue investigating empirical evidence and look a t which religions are more tolerant/restrictive 3)Pascal wagered on the ecstasy derived from a perfect being, which we take to be the God of Judeo-Christian theism and some other non-western religions as well

Three Main Steps of Peter van Inwagen's Judeo-Christian Approach

1)Pre-Fall: God made the world and it was very good. It contained creatures made in his own image who were fit to be loved by and love God. He took a risk by giving them the power to freely choose to withhold their love from him. 2)Fallen State: The horrific result was that humans would never enjoy the Beatific Vision and now they face destruction by random forces of nature and natural death. They were proud of their rebellion and slowly drifted further from God. 3) Rescue Operation: God set into motion a rescue operation in which human beings must freely choose to be reunited with God and to love him. In order for them to cooperate they must know they need to be rescued and what it means to be separated and live in a world of horrors.

Structure of Philosophical Arguments

1)Premises: what the author thinks are true 2)Conclusions: what follow from the premises by logic

Behe's Argument of Biochemical Complexity

1)The probability of irreducibly complex biological processes existing b/c of evolution is vanishingly small 2)The probability of irreducibly complex biological processes existing with an intelligent designer is very high 3)Since irreducibly complex biological processes do exist it is more probably that an intelligent and powerful designer wanted them to exist than it is for evolution to have gradually produced them.

Evaluating Arguments (Two ways)

1. Are the premises true? 2. Is the argument logical?

Dawkins on the Teleological Argument and Biochemical Complexity

1. In "The Improbability of God" Dawkins agrees with the Teleological argument in that one single chance event cannot explain the universe's complexities. 2. Dawkins disagrees with the idea that biological complexity is explainable by a creator. Instead of one chance event it was a combination of many small chance mutations overtime with natural selection. This is supported by the fossil record.

Taylor's Cosmological Argument

1. Principle of Sufficient Reason 2. The universe exists 3. There is some explanation, whether known or unknown, for the existence of the universe 4. There seems to be only three possiblilities for what this explanation could be... a)the universe is necessary, b)the creative actions of a contingent being created the universe c) the creative actions of a necessary being created the universe 5. Option (a) is highly implausible 6. Option (b) is incomplete 7. The explanation for the existence of the universe will appeal to the creative actions of a necessary being 8. A necessary being exists and is the creator of the universe. Such a being is naturally called "God"

The Evidential Problem of Evil

1. Probably there are pointless evils 2. If God exists, there are no pointless evils 3. Probably, God does not exist (Rowe)

What if there was a God who did not want to be believed?

Most people do not believe in the Shy God so we would all be saved anyway.

Belief

A belief aims to represent the way the world is

Clifford's Proposal

A belief can only be justified or rational only when the person in question has a certain amount of evidence that the belief is true.

Justified or Rational Belief

A belief that is believed on good grounds. Ex. the earth is flat (at the time it was believed), what you learn in physics.; It is justified because of why a person believes it in the first place, the way it was acquired

Johnsons opposition to the parent/child analogy

A child can infer parents are good based upon many observations of good behavior whereas a person cannot observe this with God. God is like the parent watching a child from a video camera for their whole life.

Irreducible Complexity

A single system which is composed of several interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, and where the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning ex. (non biological) Mousetrap, cell phone

True Belief

A true belief captures the way the world really is. Ex. 2+2=4

Assumption of the Evidential Problem and why theists might doubt this assumption

A: If we don't see a good reason for why God would allow a certain evil to occur, then there is probably no such good reason and so probably evil is pointless Why Theists doubt: Just because we cannot see it does not mean there is no good reason. It is just beyond our understanding

Desire

Aims to change the world to make it more like what you desire. Ex. Donald Trump and Hilary want to be president

Pointless Evil

An evil that God could have prevented without thereby losing an outweighing good or having to permit an evil equally bad or worse

What does Taylor's Argument show?

At least one necessary being exists At least one necessary being either directly or indirectly created the universe. At least one necessary being is very powerful and knowledgeable (individually or jointly) The universe is not all there is

Whose arguments are modern forms of the Teleological argument?

Behe and Biochemical Complexity Collins and The Initial Conditions of the Universe

Free Will

I decide what I want to do with my life

Inwagen's Judeo-Christian Approach's Application to Horrendous Evil

If God cancelled all the horrors with miracles he would frustrate his plan for reconciliation and we would not need to cooperate with him. We must perceive the natural consequence of living as humans in world that is hideous to God but acceptable to us. God may prevent many evils but if he prevented all evils we believe that we could live successfully separated from God.

The Problem of Evil: Basic Idea

If God exists, he would not allow evil to exist. Evil does exist so God does not exist. Primarily a concern for the God of theism.

Premise 6 Cosmological Argument and reason for rejecting (b)

If a contingent being created the universe, it would depend on an infinite number of contingent beings for its existence. A necessary being is unavoidable and still needed in order to explain the creation of the universe.

What would break down Darwin's Theory of Evolution?

If it was demonstrated that any organ could not have existed through evolution

Relevance of irreducible complexity to the Teleological Argument

If something is irreducibly complex it cannot have functioning precursors, meaning that natural selection could not have caused it. It would mean that this thing must have been designed.

Many God's Objection to Pascal's Wager

If the argument does work, which religion should we believe in? To choose consider... 1)Evidence 2)Better Afterlife 3)Worse Afterlife 4)hell? 5)Happiest here on Earth 6)Location maybe just flip a coin if this does not help

The Cumulative Case Approach

In order to go from the conclusion that a necessary being exists to the conclusion that a god of theism exists additional arguments and claims such as revelation, religious experience and other philosophical arguments must be used.

Relevance of Clifford's Evidentialism to Pascal's Wager

It is not based on truth or evidence so do not follow it.

Principle of Sufficient Reason

It is one of our most fundamental assumptions that for anything which exists, there is some explanation (whether known or unknown) for its existence, "some reason why it should exist rather than not"

An initial Objection to the Teleological Argument

It is only highly probably that at least one divine being exits so it does not make a very strong case for at least one divine being. R:We should be ok with high probability because most things we believe in life are only highly probable

Famous Proponent for the Logical Problem of Evil

J. L. Mackie

Soul-Making Theodicy

John Hick: Evil and suffering are allowed to happen so that people become better through their free wills. Men will eventually become perfect persons but cannot be made like this. He also says that our primary and overriding purpose is not to immediate pleasure but the realizing of the most valuable potentials of the human personality. Courage and fortitude would have no point. Generosity Kindness, the agape aspect of love, prudence, unselfishness, and all other ethical notions could not be formed.

Clifford's Famous Rule

Justification=Evidence. "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for everyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence"

Martyrdom Objection to Pascal's Wager

Many believers have been tortured and/or gruesomely killed for their faith. In light of this possibility, is belief in God still in our self-interest? R(Lycan and Schlesinger): (a)It is highly unlikely for people exposed to the wager to be gruesomely tortured or killed (b)suffering may be severe in the short run, but infinity outweighs any short term persecution. *Very religious people go on expeditions to dangerous locations

Relevance of Clifford's Evidentialism to Religious Belief

Many religious people base their belief on faith, not evidence. They could go searching for evidence or stop believing to be justified. It is only rational to accept testimony if it is from someone who has good arguments for truth or a clear sense experience.

Truth

Truth is how the world actually is.

Free Will Defense

Van Inwagen's Response: God made the world good but gave rational beings free will. With this power they misuse it and create a certain amount of evil.

What would Taylor say in response to Rowe?

We should keep assuming until concrete evidence comes along disproving the Principle of Sufficient Reason. More evidence supporting it than not. Assumptions are ok until proven otherwise.

Anthropic principle

if the laws of nature were not fine tuned we would not be here to comment on the fact

Atheism

no divine being exists of any kind

Exclusive Religion

only believers in that religion will be rewarded (It is best to believe in one of these because, no matter what, you will be included in the inclusive religions salvation)

Overall Result (Probability) of the Universe Version of the Teleological Argument

the chance of our Universe forming is 1 in 10,000,000,000^124 (Extremely Unlikely)

Second law of thermodynamics

the entropy of the universe is constantly increasing, getting more disorderly

Pauli Exclusion Principle

the principle of quantum mechanics that says no two fermions -such as electrons or protons- can share the same quantum state

Collins on his form of the Teleological Argument

this version of the argument offers the most persuasive case for the existence of God