Phil 347 FINAL Exam Questions With 100% Verified Answers

Phil 347 FINAL Exam Questions With 100% Verified Answers Cosmological argument Argues for the idea that the universe has a beginning. This argument follows the idea that all empirical things are in a state of generation and decay and therefore the universe is material and was created. Plato's cosmological argument premises 1.) everything that begins to exists has a cause distinct from itself 2.) the universe has a beginning 3.) hence the universe has a cause distinct from itself What is the supplementary argument for Plato's second premise? Everything empirical is in a state of decay and therefore if the universe has always existed then we would have already reached that point. Hence the universe couldn't have always existed, and therefore was created. Craig's cosmological argument premises 1.) everything that begins to exist has a cause 2.) the universe began to exist 3.) hence, the universe has a cause What is the first category of supplementary arguments to Craig's first premise? Empirical science (a posteriori) What is the second category of supplementary arguments to Craig's first premise? A priori What is the first empirical science argument supplementary to Craig's first premise? Thermodynamics - There is an constant amount of energy in the universe and a distinction between usable and unusable energy - Usable energy is decreasing → leading to the heat death of the universe. - If the universe had always existed then we would have run out of usable energy a long time ago (infinite time ago). - The universe (usable energy) cannot have always existed by the rules of thermodynamics → there needs to be a finite start. - Doesn't allow for a cycle and is irreversible. What is the second empirical science argument supplementary to Craig's first premise? Big bang cosmology - The existence of background radiation → something that would cause an explosion. - Galaxies are expanding → hubble telescope - The Big bang suggests a finite beginning. What is the first a priori supplementary argument to Craig's first premise? There can be no actual infinities of real objects - set theory: proposed that one of the sets is the infinite set; controversial - distinctions between actual infinity and potential infinity - distinctions between real and ideal objects What is the second a priori supplementary argument to Craig's first premise?