Exam 1 Philosophy of Religion PHIL 2600 Ohio University Petrick

Asking whether beauty is subjective or objective is a question within which of the following branches of philosophy?

Aesthetics

Episteme is the Greek word for:

knowledge

Revelation is:

*Prior to* reason as a source of knowledge about the fundamental nature of reality and the fundamental values that ought to govern human action.

According to many theists, God's inability to create a logical contradiction does not diminish God's omnipotence because

A contradiction is a meaningless combination of words that describes nothing

Compound propositions are

propositions composed out of two or more component propositions

In a reductio ad absurdum, you

prove a conclusion by assuming it is false and then showing that this assumption leads to a contradiction or absurdity.

Which of the following is a possible objection to Anselm's ontological argument?

The source of the absurdity expressed in premise 7 in the reductio actually may be that Anselm's definition of God is incoherent

Which of the following claims would Anselm accept?

Harmony, fragrance, succulence, softness, and beauty are present in God in their own ineffable manner

Give an example of an a prior argument for God's existence

Anselm of Canterbury's Ontological Argument

Give an example of an a posteriori argument for God's existence

Kalam Cosmological argument and Aquinas' five ways

Why did Aquinas reject all a priori arguments for God's existence?

Empiricism: all knowledge of reality is ultimately derived from sense experience, therefore, all knowledge of reality is a priori

Who used the philosophy of Aristotle to defend Islamic beliefs?

Al-Farabi

Which of the following is an example used by Draper to discuss William Lane Craig's contention that an actual infinite existing in reality would result in absurdities?

A library with an infinite number of books

Which of the following is NOT one of Aquinas' five proofs for God's existence?

The argument from the nature of love

What are Aquinas' Five Ways?

1: Change= idea of motion/movement

2: Causation= idea of efficient cause

3: Contingency= idea of contingent/possible and necessity

4: Degrees of excellence= degrees which are found in things / graduation

5: Harmony= the way in which nature is governed

According to Paul Draper, the claim that whatever begins to exist has a cause is justified only if 'begin to exist' means

Begin within time

Using different senses of a single word or phrase within a single argument is the definition for

The Fallacy of Equivocation

Which of the following is one of the claims used by Craig and Moreland to show that the universe being of finite age is supported by the second law of thermodynamics?

If the universe were infinitely old, then it would have reached a state of equilibrium.

Naturalism, as understood by C.S. Lewis, is the theory that:

all events and states of affairs are ultimately explicable in terms of natural (non-rational, non-purposive) causes.

The theory that all natural things are designed so as to have specific functions or purposes is known as:

Teleology

Which of the following is NOT one of the claims made in Aquinas' teleological argument?

Existence in reality is greater than existence in the understanding alone.

Which of the following is NOT one of the premises in the reconstruction of C.S. Lewis's Argument to show that naturalism is self-defeating?

The naturalistic theory of evolution can justify the reliability of human belief.

"A stick cannot cause movement unless it is moved by the hand" is an example from:

Aquinas- The argument from change/movement = premise 1

"Fire which is hot in the highest degree is the cause of all hot things" is an example from:

Aquinas - argument from degrees of excellence = premise 4

"An arrow by an archer" is an example from:

Aquinas - The argument from harmony/teleology = premise 5

"Set of events since the birth of a daughter or set of completed years after 1000 BCE" is an example from:

Critique of Kalam cosmological Argument by Paul Draper = This means that a potential infinite is always finite

"Set of natural numbers" is an example from:

Critique of Kalam cosmological Argument by Paul Draper = this means an actual infinite is actually infinite

"Big Bang Theory" is an example from:

Critique of Kalam cosmological Argument by Paul Draper = the universe had a beginning

The "coffee mug analogy" is from:

Dr. Petrik = second law of thermodynamics

"Library with infinite books" is from:

Critique of Kalam cosmological Argument by Paul Draper= this means that an actual infinite is actually a paradox

"Solar system, Spanish Armada, Evolution from fossils" are an argument from:

C.S. Lewis Argument that Naturalism is Self-defeating = this means that knowledge depends on validity of reasoning = human reasoning must be valid for science to be true

"Grandfather is ill because" is from:

C.S. Lewis Argument that Naturalism is Self-defeating = this means cause and effect = premise 2

"Grandfather must be ill because"

C.S. Lewis Argument that Naturalism is Self-defeating = this means ground and consequent = premise 2

"If smoke then fire" is from

C.S. Lewis Argument that Naturalism is Self-defeating = this means experience is developed by inferences

Teleological Argument

1) Natural things lacking knowledge act so as to achieve specific ends

2) Things lacking knowledge can act to achieve specific ends only if they are directed by a being with intelligence

From 1 & 2

3) There must be some intelligent being that directs these natural things

4) An intelligent designer of the natural order is what we mean by God

From 3&4

5) God exists

St. Anselms Ontological Argument

1) God is that being which nothing greater can be conceived

2) God exists in understanding but not in reality

3) Existence in reality is greater than existence in the understanding alone

4) God's existence in reality is conceivable

From 2&3

5) If God did exist in reality, he would be greater than he is

From 4&5

6) It is conceivable there is a being greater than God is

7) It is conceivable that there is a being greater than the being than which nothing greater can be conceived

BUT this is absurd so:

8) It is false that God exists in the understanding but not in reality

From 8

9) God exists in both understanding and reality

Leibniz's response to the objection to the ontological argument

1. Inconsistent Idea = an idea that expresses some property and its negation.

2. Idea of God = a being whose nature consists of only infinite perfections.

3. An infinite perfection does not express the negation of a perfection.

From 2 and 3:

4. The idea of God cannot express both a property and its negation.

From 1 and 4:

5. The idea of God is not inconsistent. (It is coherent/consistent.)

Kalam Cosmological Argument

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

2. The universe began to exist.

From 1&2

3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.

From 3

4) There is a creator of the universe

2 arguments for premise 2 of the Kalam Cosmological Argument, one of which is by Paul Draper

1. That the universe is infinitely old entails absurdities = good example of Reductio ad Absurdum

2. Paul Draper claims premise two only works if the universe began within time and that this whole argument commits the fallacy of equivocation

Who is Al-Ghazali?

Big association with the Kalam Cosmological Argument

He is the one who came up with the Impossibility of Hierarchies of the Infinite

The Impossibility of Hierarchies of the Infinite argument

1) A things age must contain more days than years

2) 1. If the universe were infinitely old, then its age would contain infinite days and infinite years.

3) One infinite cannot be greater than another infinite.

From 2 and 3

4) If the universe were infinitely old, then its age would contain the same number of days and years.

From 1 and 4

5) The universe is not infinitely old.

What paleontology example would Aristotle agree with?

The parasaurolophus with the hollow crest/horn on his head that creates a low frequency noise

How did Richard Taylor modify the teleological argument?

He believes it would be irrational to believe human sensory and cognitive faculties are the result of natural causes AND reliable, therefore: since we are unwilling to stop trusting our senses, we need to commit ourselves to the belief they were produced by an intelligent designer

C.S. Lewis argument that naturalism is self defeating

1. If naturalism is true, then all human thought is ultimately explicable as the product of non-rational causes.

2. If a belief can be explained fully as the result of non-rational causes, then the belief is not justified.

From 1 and 2:

3. If naturalism is true, then no human belief is justified.

4. If no human belief is justified, then any reasoning given in defense of naturalism is unjustified.

From 3 and 4:

5. If naturalism is true, then there is no good reason to believe that naturalism is true.

6. Naturalism is self-defeating.