Sky’s Exam #5 Review (CLASS/REVIEW SESH NOTES)
APHI 111 Spring 2024 - Mind & World - McClamrock
The Problem of Evil
○ Power of Evil (PoE): Huge amount of apparently unnecessary suffering in conflict with
powerful and good God?
● Problems of amount & distribution
○ Suffering is even more unfairly distributed. So PoE idea: Amount + distribution of suffering
argues against Big-G God
● Idea of Free will defense
○ Suggestion: Choosing good is what matter most
○ We must be able to choose otherwise; God can’t make us so that we freely choose good (is
that right?)
○ Evil as precondition or by-product of our freedom
● FWD & problems w/natural evil
○ “God can take life b/c he gave it”, “predictable world”, “opportunities” – all fail
■ (1) “Needed for a predictable world”?
● But Natural Evil is unpredictable; less disease/earthquake would be a more
predictable world
■ (2) “Needed to give opportunity for noble acts”?
● But killing others to aid one’s personal growth seems wrong
■ (3) Maybe “God can take life because He gave it?” (Not FWD)
● No, parents more not less obligated to not kill kids
○ Original sin trying to make natural evil into moral
■ Natural evil as really our fault
● FWD & problems w/moral evil
○ Limits on freedom?
■ Clear how FWD should work here but is it Freedom of Holocaust/mass murder
really best?
○ God and intervention
■ And failure to intervene can be wrong – like watching a 12 year old torture a 6 year
old? Why isn’t God wrong for allowing it?
● Job’s answer; "can’t judge God"; nihilism?
○ Idea: We can’t comprehend real good/evil
■ Job’s story, and God answer: “No judging God”
■ Idea: Even when God seems horribly wrong (like w/ Job)
More Arguments on God
● Moral argument
○ Motivation? No good evidence for, significant against
■ Not clear Type 3 Theodicy is helping at all; Problem of Evil (PoE) is creating a
(serious?) burden for Big-G Theism
○ Facts? Euthyphro dilemma:
■ Good prior, God not basis
● (a) is what’s good good because God says so
■ God prior, "good" God’s whim
● (b) does God say it’s good because it is?
● Betting argument -- Pascal's wager
○ General idea and Dominance version
■ Dominance Argument: “If doing A, is better than doing B in each possible outcome,
then do A rather than B.”
○ Dominance problem: wrong values?
■ Dominance Arguments always seem good as long as action doesn’t affect outcomes
○ General problem: prudence, not evidence
■ Maybe if no God, belief isn’t better
■ Because if God doesn’t exist
● Belief had falsity/self-deception, limited behavior/belief
● Non-belief has a virtue of truth, self-honestly, the valuing of earthly goods +
life
, ● Widespread belief in God?
○ Other explanations for belief
■ “If evidence is so bad, why so much belief?”
● U.S. high, less in rest of western world, and subgroups
● As for what common beliefs these are? Many accounts other than truth —
psychological/power/social/etc…
○ Views of atheism
■ Rational choice: Humanism, follow the reasons; atheism as not nihilism but
anti-nihilism
■ “God exists and I know it because there wouldn’t be so much widespread belief in
God if he didn’t exist.”
■ Anti-atheism is the reason why people don’t believe in God, it’s because they don’t
wanna be an atheist
Nihilism and Significance
● False contrast and death, size, effects, infinity, God
○ Death: Makes your life an insignificant speck in time?
○ Size: “I’m so tiny”: But big is just more absurd
○ Effects: “Won’t matter in 1,000,000 years”; but if it did, more absurd?
○ Infinity: And in reality, “brush with death” can increase sense of life’s value
○ God: Questions about the existence and nature of a higher power.
● Contingency, absurdity, & moral perspective
○ Contingency: Nothing is significant because everything is just contingent accidents.
○ Absurdity: Challenges in reconciling human experiences with divine purpose.
○ Moral perspective: Consideration of ethical principles and divine command theory.
● Externalism & subjectivism as challenges
○ Externalism: Challenges to the notion of a transcendent reality beyond human
comprehension.
○ Subjectivism: Variability of individual beliefs and interpretations of religious teachings.
iCLICKER QUESTIONS
wed, 04/10
1. Which of these theistic paradoxes did Professor McClamrock suggest in class were really just “silly” and
never convinced anyone of anything?
a. Both of them
b. The Paradox of Omnipotence, but not The Paradox of Freedom and Foreknowledge
c. The Paradox of Freedom and Divide Foreknowledge, but not The Paradox of Omnipotence
d. Neither
e. All of the above
2. The presence of widespread kludges of nature was claimed to be relevant to the Design Argument
because…
a. Kludges are more likely in divine design than in evolution
b. No God could have used kludges
c. Evolution would not have used kludges
d. We should expect them from evolution, but not so much from divide design
e. Kludging proves that there is no God
fri, 04/12
3. Which of these was not considered in class as a “sometimes suggested possible problem for evolution”?
a. There is no reproductive advantages
b. Acquired characteristics can’t be passed on
c. Mutations are almost always harmful
d. The fossil raptor is full of gaps
e. None, all of these were considered as suggested possible problems for evolution
4. Professor McClamrock said in class that accepting evolution has what consequence?
a. It gave an argument against the existence of God
APHI 111 Spring 2024 - Mind & World - McClamrock
The Problem of Evil
○ Power of Evil (PoE): Huge amount of apparently unnecessary suffering in conflict with
powerful and good God?
● Problems of amount & distribution
○ Suffering is even more unfairly distributed. So PoE idea: Amount + distribution of suffering
argues against Big-G God
● Idea of Free will defense
○ Suggestion: Choosing good is what matter most
○ We must be able to choose otherwise; God can’t make us so that we freely choose good (is
that right?)
○ Evil as precondition or by-product of our freedom
● FWD & problems w/natural evil
○ “God can take life b/c he gave it”, “predictable world”, “opportunities” – all fail
■ (1) “Needed for a predictable world”?
● But Natural Evil is unpredictable; less disease/earthquake would be a more
predictable world
■ (2) “Needed to give opportunity for noble acts”?
● But killing others to aid one’s personal growth seems wrong
■ (3) Maybe “God can take life because He gave it?” (Not FWD)
● No, parents more not less obligated to not kill kids
○ Original sin trying to make natural evil into moral
■ Natural evil as really our fault
● FWD & problems w/moral evil
○ Limits on freedom?
■ Clear how FWD should work here but is it Freedom of Holocaust/mass murder
really best?
○ God and intervention
■ And failure to intervene can be wrong – like watching a 12 year old torture a 6 year
old? Why isn’t God wrong for allowing it?
● Job’s answer; "can’t judge God"; nihilism?
○ Idea: We can’t comprehend real good/evil
■ Job’s story, and God answer: “No judging God”
■ Idea: Even when God seems horribly wrong (like w/ Job)
More Arguments on God
● Moral argument
○ Motivation? No good evidence for, significant against
■ Not clear Type 3 Theodicy is helping at all; Problem of Evil (PoE) is creating a
(serious?) burden for Big-G Theism
○ Facts? Euthyphro dilemma:
■ Good prior, God not basis
● (a) is what’s good good because God says so
■ God prior, "good" God’s whim
● (b) does God say it’s good because it is?
● Betting argument -- Pascal's wager
○ General idea and Dominance version
■ Dominance Argument: “If doing A, is better than doing B in each possible outcome,
then do A rather than B.”
○ Dominance problem: wrong values?
■ Dominance Arguments always seem good as long as action doesn’t affect outcomes
○ General problem: prudence, not evidence
■ Maybe if no God, belief isn’t better
■ Because if God doesn’t exist
● Belief had falsity/self-deception, limited behavior/belief
● Non-belief has a virtue of truth, self-honestly, the valuing of earthly goods +
life
, ● Widespread belief in God?
○ Other explanations for belief
■ “If evidence is so bad, why so much belief?”
● U.S. high, less in rest of western world, and subgroups
● As for what common beliefs these are? Many accounts other than truth —
psychological/power/social/etc…
○ Views of atheism
■ Rational choice: Humanism, follow the reasons; atheism as not nihilism but
anti-nihilism
■ “God exists and I know it because there wouldn’t be so much widespread belief in
God if he didn’t exist.”
■ Anti-atheism is the reason why people don’t believe in God, it’s because they don’t
wanna be an atheist
Nihilism and Significance
● False contrast and death, size, effects, infinity, God
○ Death: Makes your life an insignificant speck in time?
○ Size: “I’m so tiny”: But big is just more absurd
○ Effects: “Won’t matter in 1,000,000 years”; but if it did, more absurd?
○ Infinity: And in reality, “brush with death” can increase sense of life’s value
○ God: Questions about the existence and nature of a higher power.
● Contingency, absurdity, & moral perspective
○ Contingency: Nothing is significant because everything is just contingent accidents.
○ Absurdity: Challenges in reconciling human experiences with divine purpose.
○ Moral perspective: Consideration of ethical principles and divine command theory.
● Externalism & subjectivism as challenges
○ Externalism: Challenges to the notion of a transcendent reality beyond human
comprehension.
○ Subjectivism: Variability of individual beliefs and interpretations of religious teachings.
iCLICKER QUESTIONS
wed, 04/10
1. Which of these theistic paradoxes did Professor McClamrock suggest in class were really just “silly” and
never convinced anyone of anything?
a. Both of them
b. The Paradox of Omnipotence, but not The Paradox of Freedom and Foreknowledge
c. The Paradox of Freedom and Divide Foreknowledge, but not The Paradox of Omnipotence
d. Neither
e. All of the above
2. The presence of widespread kludges of nature was claimed to be relevant to the Design Argument
because…
a. Kludges are more likely in divine design than in evolution
b. No God could have used kludges
c. Evolution would not have used kludges
d. We should expect them from evolution, but not so much from divide design
e. Kludging proves that there is no God
fri, 04/12
3. Which of these was not considered in class as a “sometimes suggested possible problem for evolution”?
a. There is no reproductive advantages
b. Acquired characteristics can’t be passed on
c. Mutations are almost always harmful
d. The fossil raptor is full of gaps
e. None, all of these were considered as suggested possible problems for evolution
4. Professor McClamrock said in class that accepting evolution has what consequence?
a. It gave an argument against the existence of God
