Philosphy 100 Final Exam Notes
A. Essay Prompt – Purpose of Investigating God’s Existence
Card 1
Front: What is the philosophical point of investigating whether belief in God needs public, reasoned evidence?
Back:
To determine whether beliefs about God should meet the same rational standards as other significant claims. Philosophers ask whether God’s existence is too important to leave to unexamined faith, and whether publicly shareable reasons are needed to justify belief in something that influences morality, politics, meaning, and human destiny.
Card 2
Front: Why might God’s existence be a philosophical concern?
Back:
Because belief in God shapes metaphysics (what exists), ethics (what is good), epistemology (what counts as knowledge), and meaning. If God exists, reality is fundamentally different. If not, human obligations and worldviews must be grounded differently. Philosophy studies these foundational questions.
B. Aquinas’s First Cause Argument (Cosmological Argument)
(Pojman p. 103–109, 111–115)
Card 3
Front: Aquinas Premise 1 (Explained)**
Back:
There are things in the world that come into existence and pass out of existence (things are contingent).
Card 4
Front: Aquinas Premise 1 — Assessment
Back:
Defensible because empirical observation supports contingency.
Refutable because some argue quantum physics suggests spontaneous events not requiring causes.
Card 5
Front: Aquinas Premise 2 (Explained)**
Back:
Nothing can be the cause of its own existence; something cannot bring itself into being.
Card 6
Front: Aquinas Premise 2 — Assessment
Back:
Defensible because self-causation is logically incoherent.
Refutable by claiming the universe might be eternal or self-existent without needing an external cause.
Card 7
Front: Aquinas Premise 3 (Explained)**
Back:
There cannot be an infinite regress of causes; otherwise no cause would ever begin causing anything.
Card 8
Front: Aquinas Premise 3 — Assessment
Back:
Defensible because infinite causal chains seem to undermine explanation.
Refutable because some philosophers accept infinite regress as possible (e.g., Russell, some cosmologists).
Card 9
Front: Aquinas Conclusion
Back:
Therefore, there must be a first uncaused cause—this is what we call God.
Card 10
Front: Weakness of Aquinas’s conclusion
Back:
Even if a first cause exists, it may not be identical to the God of classical theism. Argument gives a cause, not necessarily an all-good, all-knowing personal deity.
C. Faith and Reason
Card 11
Front: What is “faith” in philosophy?
Back:
Belief, trust, or commitment that goes beyond strict evidence; sometimes belief based on authority or revelation.
Card 12
Front: What is “reason”?
Back:
Human capacity for logical analysis, argument, and inference that aims at publicly shareable justification.
Card 13
Front: The central question of this unit
Back:
Should religious beliefs be grounded in rational evidence, or is faith independent of reason?
D. Tertullian’s “Credo quia absurdum” (“I believe because it is absurd”)
Card 14
Front: Tertullian’s main idea
Back:
Faith does not need rational justification; in fact, the paradoxical nature of Christianity is what makes it compelling.
Card 15
Front: Philosophical problem with Tertullian
Back:
If belief based on absurdity is valid, any belief (no matter how irrational) would be justified; undermines rational discourse.
E. Pascal’s Wager
Card 16
Front: What is Pascal’s Wager?
Back:
A prudential argument: It is rational to believe in God because the potential gain (eternal happiness) outweighs the finite risk.
Card 17
Front: Strength of Pascal’s Wager
Back:
Uses decision theory; works even if evidence for God is uncertain.
Card 18
Front: Weakness of Pascal’s Wager
Back:
The “many gods problem”: Multiple religions promise rewards and punishments, making the wager indecisive.
F. Why Investigate Public Evidence for God?
Card 19
Front: Why some think we must have public, reasoned evidence for God
Back:
Because beliefs about God influence political decisions, morality, and social expectations. Publicly shared reasons prevent dogmatism and harm.
Card 20
Front: Why some think reasoned evidence is not required
Back:
Faith deals with supernatural truths that transcend empirical methods; religious belief is a personal existential commitment, not a scientific hypothesis.
G. Cardinal Virtues (4)
Card 21
Front: Prudence
Back:
Right reason in action; the ability to judge the appropriate action at the right time.
Card 22
Front: Justice
Back:
Giving each person what is due; fairness and moral rightness.
Card 23
Front: Temperance
Back:
Moderation of desires and appetites; self-control.
Card 24
Front: Fortitude
Back:
Courage to do the good despite fear, difficulty, or suffering.
H. Theological Virtues (3)
Card 25
Front: Faith (Theological Virtue)
Back:
Supernatural trust in God; believing truths revealed by God.
Card 26
Front: Hope
Back:
Confidence in God’s promises, especially salvation.
Card 27
Front: Charity (Love)
Back:
Highest virtue; loving God above all things and loving neighbor for God’s sake.
I. Essay Outline Breakdown (as individual cards)
Card 28
Front: Intro – Purpose of the debate
Back:
Set up the issue: Should belief in God require public, rational evidence? Why does God’s existence matter in philosophy? Introduce Aquinas, Pascal, and Tertullian as representing different approaches.
Card 29
Front: Section 1 – Why God’s existence matters philosophically
Back:
Affects metaphysics, ethics, meaning, and world structure. Philosophers must evaluate foundational claims.
Card 30
Front: Section 2 – Arguments for requiring reason/evidence
Back:
Prevents irrational belief; ensures beliefs with public consequences are justified; philosophy seeks universal reasoning.
Card 31
Front: Section 3 – Arguments against requiring evidence
Back:
Faith transcends reason; relationship with God is personal; some truths beyond empirical demonstration.
Card 32
Front: Section 4 – Aquinas’s First Cause Argument
Back:
Break down each premise, defend and refute each one, show the distinction between a cause and a personal God.
Card 33
Front: Section 5 – Pascal’s Wager
Back:
Belief justified by prudence, not evidence; strengths and weaknesses.
Card 34
Front: Section 6 – Tertullian
Back:
Faith as independent from and even opposed to rational proof; challenges philosophical method.
Card 35
Front: Conclusion
Back:
Argue your position: Either philosophy should examine evidence for God because the claim is too important or faith stands apart from rational justification. Reconnect Aquinas, Pascal, and Tertullian.
Free Will vs Determinism
The debate centers around whether human actions are determined by external factors or if individuals possess the autonomy to choose freely.
Considerations include moral responsibility, the implications of scientific understanding on human behavior, and theological perspectives.
Explore how free will affirms personal moral responsibility while determinism suggests that all events are predetermined, challenging the notion of choice. Evaluate key philosophers' perspectives on both sides, such as compatibilism's attempt to reconcile the two viewpoints. Ultimately, the discussion invites us to consider whether our actions are truly our own or if we are simply products of a causal chain, prompting further inquiry into moral accountability and the nature of human existence.