Flashcards
RS Philosophy
Cards in this deck (10)
- 1existence of GodPaley
Hume
Anselm
Gaunilo
Kant
Aquinas
Hume
Russell - 2PaleyDesign argument
1) design qua regularity
2) design qua purpose - 3Humecriticises the design argument in 7 ways
1)analogies
2)organic universe
3)experience
4)apparent design
5)poor design
6)many builders
7)absent designer
wrote before Paley's analogy. - 4Anselm - a Christianontological argument
premise one - God is 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived.'
premise two - it is greater to exist in reality than in the mind alone
conclusion - God exists - 5Gaunilo - also believed in the existence of God but not Anselm's way of trying to prove itcriticises Anselm
uses reductio ad absurdum (rediculous) argument to prove Anselm's arguement doesn't work
premise one - i can imagiine a perfect island. no greater island can be conceived.
premise two - it is greater/more perfect to exist in reality than only in the mind
conclusion - my perfect island exists - 6Anselmreplies to Gaunilo in future editions with the section 'on behalf of the fool'
he says it can be applied to God cus
1) God is unique and the only limitlessly perfect being.
2) all beings depend on something else for existence - contingent = have a beginning or an end BUT GOD DOES NOT DEPEND ON ANYTHING - 7Kantcriticises ontological argument
you cannot move from a definition of God to the claim that God must exist in reality
'existence is obviously not a real predicate'
by saying something exists doesnt add to our knowledge of that thing, just tells us that there happens to be a thing that matches it description. - 8Aquinas3/5 ways he proves God's existence is cosmological
CAUSATION
1) motion
2) cause and effect
3) contingency (dependent)
motion - there must be a first unmoved moved
cause and effect - there must be a first, efficient cause
contingency - there must be a necessary being which brought the first contingent being into existence - 9Humecriticises cosmological argument
1) fallacy of composition - cause and effect happens inside the universe but that doesnt mean we can apply the rule to the universe itself
2) experience - we have no experience of creating a universe and so we cant talk meaningfully about it
3) evidence - not enough evidence to say the universe had a cause or what the cause was
4) God of Classical Theism - even if God was the cause there is no way of knowing that it is the God of CT - 10Russellcriticises the cosmological argument
1) fallacy of composition - error - just cus we have a mother doesn't mean the universe has a mother
2) brute fact - pointless to discuss the cause of it. no evidence of the catagory 'necessary being' in which we would put God
3) no evidence for a necessary being