Philosophy of Religion: Anthology

What did Mackie write about?

Evil and omnipotence

Outline Mackie’s argument

God is omnipotent and wholly good yet evil exists, which classical theology fails to adequately explain. Also discusses paradox of omnipotence.

What is the paradox of omnipotence?

That God can limit his powers.

What do Russell and Copleston discuss?

Debate over God’s existence between Copleston (Christian) and Russel.

What does Copleston argue initially?

Argument from contingency.

Outline Russell’s counterarguments

Rejects necessity and the universe having a necessary cause. Compares Copleston’s assumptions to illogical conclusions making inductive leaps.

How does Copleston and Russel’s debate end?

• COPLESTON: The universe needs an external explanation

• RUSSEL: That is unnecessary

No conclusion drawn, highlights difficulty of religion due to language divides.

What solutions does Mackie critique as ‘fallacious’?

• That evil is necessary for good

• Free will

• Evil contributes to greater good

• Paradox of omnipotence

How does Mackie critique evil as necessary for good?

Limits God’s omnipotence.

How does Mackie critique Free Will defence?

God could have created moral humans to eradicate moral evil.

How does Mackie critique evil contributing to a greater good?

Illogical as there must then be ‘levels’ of good and evil, and how would these be categorised etc etc…

Give Flew’s parable and explanation?

Wisdom’s parable of the garden, arguing religious claims are overqualified to avoid falsification

What does Flew argue about overqualifying religious arguments?

Religious beliefs die the death of a thousand qualifications when faith has no backing due to constant alterations of it to survive assertions.

Outline Hare’s counterargument to Flew

Lunatic and dons parable, suggesting religious beliefs are ‘bliks’, saying it’s more important how believers view the world.

Define bliks

Deep rooted frameworks for worldviews

Outline Mitchell’s first perspective

Partisan and Stranger parable, arguing believers believe things against evidence and belief requires struggles with doubt instead of rejecting falsification altogether

Conclusion of the Flew/Hare/Mitchell anthology

Flew thinks religious claims must be falsifiable

Hare suggests it’s about interpretation

Mitchell argues faith is a commitment even in doubt

Outline Mitchell’s second position

Religious claims are assertions but believers can acknowledge evidence against