metaphysics of
DISCLAIMER: THIS DOCUMENT DOES NOT INCLUDE SECTION 3.3.1 ‘THE CONCEPT AND NATURE
OF GOD’.
Overview:
3.3.2 Arguments relating to the existence of God
Ontological arguments:
o 3 ontological arguments: Anselm, Descartes, and Malcolm.
o 3 issues with ontological arguments: Gaunilo’s perfect island, empiricist
objections to a priori arguments for existence, Kant’s objection based on
existence not being a predicate.
Teleological/design arguments:
o 3 teleological arguments: Design argument from analogy (Hume), Paley’s
design argument from spatial order, and Swinburne’s design argument
from temporal order.
o 4 issues with teleological/design arguments: Hume on his argument from
analogy, spatial disorder, fails because an argument from a unique case,
and whether God is the best or only explanation.
Cosmological arguments:
o 6 cosmological arguments: Kalam (temporal causation), Aquinas 1st way
(motion), Aquinas 2nd way (atemporal causation), Aquinas 3rd way
(contingency), Descartes (causation based on his continuing existence),
Leibniz (contingency based on principle of sufficient reason).
o 4 issues with cosmological arguments: possibility of infinite series, Hume
on the ‘causal principle’, Russell’s fallacy of composition, impossibility of a
necessary being (Hume and Russell).
Problem of evil on whether God’s attributes can be reconciled with the
existence of evil: difference between moral and natural evil.
o 2 arguments for the problem of evil: The logical problem of evil, and the
evidential problem of evil.
o 2 issues with the problem of evil: Plantinga’s free will defence, and Hick’s
soul making (Irenean) theodicy.
3.3.3 Religious language
The distinction between cognitivism and non-cognitivism about religious
language.
The empiricist/logical positivist challenges to the status of metaphysical (here,
religious) language: the verification principle and verification/falsification (Ayer).
o Hick’s response to Ayer (eschatological verification) and issues arising from
that response.
Further responses (the university debate): Flew on falsification (the gardener),
Mitchell’s response to Flew (the partisan), and Hare’s response to Flew (bliks and
the lunatic) – and issues with these three responses.
DISCLAIMER: THIS DOCUMENT DOES NOT INCLUDE SECTION 3.3.1 ‘THE CONCEPT AND NATURE
OF GOD’.
Overview:
3.3.2 Arguments relating to the existence of God
Ontological arguments:
o 3 ontological arguments: Anselm, Descartes, and Malcolm.
o 3 issues with ontological arguments: Gaunilo’s perfect island, empiricist
objections to a priori arguments for existence, Kant’s objection based on
existence not being a predicate.
Teleological/design arguments:
o 3 teleological arguments: Design argument from analogy (Hume), Paley’s
design argument from spatial order, and Swinburne’s design argument
from temporal order.
o 4 issues with teleological/design arguments: Hume on his argument from
analogy, spatial disorder, fails because an argument from a unique case,
and whether God is the best or only explanation.
Cosmological arguments:
o 6 cosmological arguments: Kalam (temporal causation), Aquinas 1st way
(motion), Aquinas 2nd way (atemporal causation), Aquinas 3rd way
(contingency), Descartes (causation based on his continuing existence),
Leibniz (contingency based on principle of sufficient reason).
o 4 issues with cosmological arguments: possibility of infinite series, Hume
on the ‘causal principle’, Russell’s fallacy of composition, impossibility of a
necessary being (Hume and Russell).
Problem of evil on whether God’s attributes can be reconciled with the
existence of evil: difference between moral and natural evil.
o 2 arguments for the problem of evil: The logical problem of evil, and the
evidential problem of evil.
o 2 issues with the problem of evil: Plantinga’s free will defence, and Hick’s
soul making (Irenean) theodicy.
3.3.3 Religious language
The distinction between cognitivism and non-cognitivism about religious
language.
The empiricist/logical positivist challenges to the status of metaphysical (here,
religious) language: the verification principle and verification/falsification (Ayer).
o Hick’s response to Ayer (eschatological verification) and issues arising from
that response.
Further responses (the university debate): Flew on falsification (the gardener),
Mitchell’s response to Flew (the partisan), and Hare’s response to Flew (bliks and
the lunatic) – and issues with these three responses.
