PHIL101 - Existence of God Argument L1-L5

Lecture 1: Arguments in Philosophy

Key Topics:

1. What is Philosophy?

   • Philosophy is the study of fundamental questions regarding existence, knowledge, morality, reason, and the human experience. It serves as a foundation for critical thinking and helps us explore profound inquiries about human life.

   • Branches of philosophy include:

     • Metaphysics: Examines the nature of reality, including concepts like being, existence, and the universe.

     • Epistemology: Investigates the nature and limits of knowledge and belief, pondering questions like "What is knowledge?" and "How do we know what we know?"

     • Aesthetics: Scrutinizes the nature of beauty and art, addressing questions about taste and artistic value.

     • Philosophy of Mind: Studies the nature of the mind, consciousness, and their relationship to the physical body, including discussions on dualism and materialism.

     • Ethics: Focuses on moral principles, debating what constitutes right and wrong behavior and examining moral dilemmas.

     • Political Philosophy: Studies the state, governance, justice, laws, and the rights and responsibilities of citizens.

     • Logic: Analyzes valid reasoning and argumentation, establishing principles that guide correct reasoning.

   • Philosophy emphasizes reasoning and critical thinking, enabling individuals to analyze arguments and assumptions logically.

2. Arguments:

   • Definition: An argument consists of a set of premises that lead to a conclusion, serving as a structured way to support claims or beliefs.

   • Premise-Conclusion Form:

     • Example:

     1. Heather likes wine from every Central Otago vineyard.

     2. Carrick is a Central Otago vineyard.
        ∴ Therefore, Heather likes wine from Carrick.

3. Validity & Soundness:

   • Valid Argument: An argument is valid if it is impossible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false, indicating a strong logical relationship.

   • Sound Argument: A sound argument is both valid and has all true premises, guaranteeing the truth of the conclusion.

   • Example of Invalid Argument:

     • Premise: Everyone who likes whisky drinks at Albar.

     • Premise: Heather drinks at Albar.

     • Conclusion: Therefore, Heather likes whisky.
       (This is invalid because there may be non-whisky drinkers who also frequent Albar.)

4. Assessing Arguments:

   • Assess arguments by checking for validity (logical structure) and the truth of the premises (factual accuracy).

   • If an argument is found unsound, it can be repaired by adding relevant premises or revising the logic to ensure both validity and truth.

Lecture 2: The Cosmological Argument

Key Topics:

1. Definition of God:

   • In philosophical discussions, God is commonly defined as a being who is omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), omnibenevolent (all-good), eternal (outside of time), and the creator of the universe. Understanding these attributes is crucial for evaluating arguments regarding God's existence.

2. Cosmological Argument (Aquinas):

   • Version 1: Argument from Change

     • Premises:

     1. Everything that undergoes change has a cause for its change.

     2. There cannot be an infinite regress of causes; hence, there must be a starting point.

     3. ∴ Therefore, a first cause (which is God) must exist.

     • Problems:

     • Assumes that causal chains must have a definitive starting point, dismissing the possibility of an infinite regress of events.

     • It does not logically prove that this first cause is God, as it only identifies a cause without characteristics.

   • Version 2: Argument from Contingency

     • Premises:

     1. Contingent beings (things that rely on something else for existence) exist.

     2. Contingent beings require a cause for their existence.

     3. ∴ Therefore, there must be a necessary being (God) that caused their existence.

     • Problems:

     • Contingent beings might exist eternally without needing a first cause, challenging the acceptance of a necessary being.

     • The concept of a "necessary being" does not exclusively point to God and could be challenged by scientific theories like the Big Bang.

3. Critiques:

   • Infinite causal chains might be possible, presenting a challenge to the argument that something must have begun the universe.

   • The existence of the universe could be viewed as a brute fact, not necessitating any divine explanation.

Lecture 3: The Ontological Argument

Key Topics:

1. A Priori vs. A Posteriori:

   • A Priori: Knowledge that is independent of experience; for instance, logical truths where the understanding does not require empirical evidence (e.g., "All bachelors are unmarried").

   • A Posteriori: Knowledge that is derived from experience or empirical observation (e.g., "Ted is a bachelor").

2. Anselm’s Ontological Argument:

   • Definition: Anselm defined God as the greatest conceivable being, asserting that if we can conceive of God, He must exist in reality.

   • Reductio ad Absurdum:

   1. Assume God does not exist.

   2. If that is true, then a greater being (existing in reality) can be conceived.

   3. This leads to a contradiction, establishing the conclusion that God must exist.

   • Guanilo’s Parody:

     • Guanilo counters Anselm by proposing the idea of a "Greatest Possible Island," suggesting that just because one can conceive of an idealized island does not necessitate its existence in reality.

3. Descartes’ Version:

   • Premise: Existence is a perfection, indicating that a perfect being (God) must exist as part of its definition.

   • Kant’s Critique: Critiques the argument stating that existence is not a predicate; it does not add anything to the concept of a being.

4. Problems:

   • The act of defining something into existence is a flawed logical move (for example, defining a non-existent Martian).

   • Ambiguities in the premises can be problematic, such as defining the characteristics of a perfect being.

Lecture 4: The Teleological Argument

Key Topics:

1. Paley’s Watchmaker Analogy:

   • William Paley argues that complex objects, such as watches, imply the existence of a designer because their intricate design suggests intention; similarly, the universe's complexity implies the existence of God as its designer.

   • Forms:

     • Local Teleology: Specific parts of nature (e.g., the human eye) exhibit fine-tuned design, indicating a purpose.

     • Global Teleology: The universe, as a whole, reflects order and purpose, suggesting a deliberate creator.

2. Hume’s Critiques:

   • David Hume critiques the analogy, saying the universe may be poorly designed or flawed, as evidenced by natural disasters and imperfections (like diseases) that challenge the idea of a benevolent creator.

   • He argues that design does not necessarily prove a benevolent or omnipotent God.

3. Darwinian Evolution as Counter:

   • The theory of evolution explains the complexity and diversity of life through natural selection, which operates without the need for a designer.

   • Hume points to examples of imperfect designs, such as the human eye's blind spot and inefficiencies in the birth canal, as evidence against a perfect designer.

4. Predictive Equivalence Problem:

   • Both creationism and evolution make similar predictions, such as the existence of fossil records; thus, there is insufficient evidence to objectively support one theory over the other.

Lecture 5: The Problem of Evil

Key Topics:

1. Types of Evil:

   • Natural Evil: Suffering caused by natural events without human intervention, such as earthquakes, floods, and diseases.

   • Moral Evil: Suffering that results from human actions, including war, crime, and oppression.

2. Argument from Evil:

   • The argument presents a logical challenge to theism:

   1. An omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent God exists.

   2. Evil and suffering exist in the world.
      ∴ Therefore, such a God cannot exist without contradiction.

   • Inconsistent Tetrad: The combination of God’s existence, the reality of evil, God’s desire to eliminate evil, and God's omnipotence leads to a logical contradiction.

3. Theodicies (Defenses):

   • Free Will Defense: This posits that evil results from the exercise of human freedom; God allows free will even if it leads to suffering, as it’s integral to genuine moral choices.

   • Higher Goods: Some argue that virtues like compassion and heroism would not exist without suffering and evil experiences.

   • Best Possible World (Leibniz): Leibniz posits that the presence of evil contributes to a greater balance of goods and is necessary for achieving a better world.

   • Means-End Justification: Some argue that certain evils lead to good outcomes, such as the pain of surgery leading to a beneficial recovery.

4. Critiques:

   • Free Will Defense: Critics argue this does not account for natural evils like disasters and diseases, which are not a product of human choice.

   • Higher Goods: Critics posit that extreme suffering cannot be justified by potential benefits, such as instances of child abuse.

   • Gratuitous Evil: The existence of seemingly unnecessary evil directly challenges the notion of an all-good and powerful God.

Key Themes Across Lectures:

1. Argument Structure: The importance of premise-conclusion relationships, validity, and soundness in evaluating arguments.

2. God’s Existence: Explored through cosmological, ontological, and teleological arguments, along with significant critiques.

3. Problem of Evil: A central challenge to theistic claims, leading to various theodicies and philosophical debates.

4. Philosophical Tools: Critical techniques like reductio ad absurdum, distinctions between a priori and a posteriori knowledge, alongside critiques by philosophers such as Hume and Kant.
   These notes synthesize all lectures, emphasizing logical structure, critiques, and interconnections between arguments.