Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
42 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Epistemology
|
Study of a set of philosophical ideas (knowledge, belief, doubt, faith, uncertainty, etc.,)
|
|
Meaning Question: what is knowledge?
|
Justified true belief (classic view)
ex. I know obama is president. I believe he is president. before you know something it must be justified. so in this case, follow election |
|
Truth Question: Is there any knowledge?
|
Religious dogmatists: yes
Religious sceptics: no |
|
Logical connections question: Is faith a form of knowledge?
|
yes: Religious dogmatist- you can know God exists w/certainty/high probability
Anti religious dogmatists-God does not exist no: Religious fideist-I can’t know God exists, but I can live as if I know He does. Religious skeptic (agnostic)- I choose to live as if I know God did not exist |
|
Forms of knowledge: Primary sources
|
1. Experience (sense exp)
2. Reason 3. Intuition- sudden insight where you recognize something true ex. Laughing at a joke |
|
Forms of knowledge: Secondary sources
|
4. Authority/testimony-were told. Most of what we know is here
5. Revelation-Special revelation; knowledge from God |
|
What is fatalism?
|
Philosophical claim that the future is already determined.
-remember this is not a claim that we know everything but it's metaphysics (reality) |
|
Counterfeit fatalism
|
idle ‘lazy’ argument = if something is fated to happen to you, it will happen no matter what you do, doesn’t matter what you do (might as well be lazy)
-how could you use this counterfeit fatalism? If I’m fated to fail, I’ll fail no matter what, no point in studying *doesn't matter what you do, never matters |
|
The problem with Counterfeit fatalism or maybe just fatalism..
|
1. Encourages irresponsible life
2. Logically incoherent because it makes impossible things possible Ex. Kendra is not a mom. It’s fated that in 2041 she’s a grandma. False Fatalism makes her being a grandma possible without her being a mom. |
|
local fatalism
|
acknowledgment that a certain outcome is unavoidable
Ex. Organic chemistry exam you never studied for-15 mins before-you really have no choice, you can’t pass exam. |
|
Real fatalism
|
What you do does make a difference; is fated to make a difference
|
|
Why believe fatalism?
|
o Appeal of logic-law of the excluded middle, all propositions are either true or false, already true or already false; guarantees that a proposition will be true or false
o Appeal to God- because God knows everything, God knows what will happen in the future; therefore the future is already set |
|
Logical question: is freewill necessary for moral responsibility?
|
Classic answer- yes, it provides a foundation for moral responsibility.
|
|
Why should we care?
|
Freewill is connected to other things: praise, blame, punishment, reward.
we need freewill to do these things. |
|
Determinism
|
the philosophical claim that for everything that happens there are conditions in which given those conditions they have to happen.
|
|
Hard determinism (not an option for Christians)
|
Determinism is true
No freewill No Moral responsibility |
|
Soft Determinism
|
D can be true; doesn’t matter
Yes Fw Yes MR |
|
Indeterminism
|
D is not true
Yes Fw Yes Mr |
|
What is freewill? Rational fw
|
There is a personal connection between me and my choice. I have personal reason to make the choice that I make.
??Dct Fw incomp fw Liberatarianfw Compatibilist fw Sdfw |
|
What is freewill? nonrational fw
|
You don't need any reason to make a choice.
Epircirean FW (peicurus, 300 BC) ‘swerve’-atoms move uncausesd-atomism The swerve is the basis for moral responsibility *given the person’s character and circumstances at time T, the person is causily determ. To choose between options a,b,…(the range). Which of these options the person chooses is not causily determ. by the person’s character and circumstances? |
|
Compatabilist
|
Who and what you are determines the choices that you make. Free will is the outflow of who you are. Anything that would be better than anything else is the choice that you would make.
|
|
Libertarian
|
in order for it to be freewill there has to be a range in which you choose from.
ex. Ex. Comp- 1 hr in dorm-talk on phone or study for test? You character chooses Liber- same as above but you’re not determined by your character & circumstances |
|
Example of Bob: compatabilist and libertarian perspectives:
|
Comp-that was a free choice but this one he chose means that most to him
Liber-it this was a free choice, there had to be a range. He could have chosen the other ones within the range. |
|
Prayer in freewill
|
Prayer requests that involve the future free choices of other people.
Ex. Praying that someone would get a job. 1 john 5:14-15- according to God’s revealed will, b/c if it was a secret will of God, how would you know? |
|
example of mary and martha: how compt. interpret this
|
How the compatabilist and libertarian interpret this:
Compt. Fw= God guarantees this result if you prayed in faith. Mary and Martha forgive eachother Objection- God is like a puppeteer controlling Mary an dMartha |
|
example of mary and martha: how lib. interpret this
|
Libertarian fw= unless God takes away their free will, God has to leave open possibilities, so God works in hearts to assist them in making choices.
Objection: leaves out confidence, leaves us in a weak position |
|
lesson from freewill lecture
|
*as a fact of our lives, we’re going to have some ?s about our worldview that we haven’t answered/we may never answer. Even so we need to continue to live our lives and not wait to understand ?s.
We have to be practical. People are in serious trouble when their worldview is shattered. |
|
Arguing that God exists
|
As Christians we have no obligation to argue for God's existence.
|
|
Value in arguing for God's existence
|
1. Helps in evangelism-gets people thinking
2. Helps Christians whose faith has become weak |
|
Arguing for proving: good proof
|
a) Objective-valid deductive argument with true premises (guarantee its conclusions)
b) Subjective-any argument that convinces someone Proofs for God’s existence tend to be person relative-one argument might help one person and not another |
|
Nondeductive arguments
|
this we use for God.
show conclusion to be probably (99%) true Cumulative case for God’s existence-arguments taken together that are more powerful Facts-use things everyone believes and say wouldn’t fact #1 make sense if God exists? Inference tot eht best explanation-God being the best explanation 1. Ex. Fact=existence of the universe (cosmological argument) the best expl for existence is god 2. Ex. Fact=order & structure of universe (teleological) best explanation: a divine mind 3. Ex. Logic/math work. Best expl-God, divine mind 4. Ex. Moral experience best expl-creator who gives right and wrong *Take these and argue a highly probable and rational case for God’s existence |
|
Ontological argument
|
St. Anselm, “ the ontological argument” it argues from the existence of the idea of God, the actual existence of God.
If the idea of God exists, then God must exist. |
|
Ontological argument: statment 1
|
1. God is a being than which nothing greater can be conceived (TWNGCBC)
|
|
Ontological argument: statement 2-
God is a being than which nothing greater can be conceived (TWNGCBC) |
2. Everyone understands these words: a being (TWNGCBC)
|
|
Ontological argument: statement 3-
Everyone understands these words: a being (TWNGCBC) |
3. Whatever is understood exists in the understanding
|
|
Ontological argument: statement 4-
Whatever is understood exists in the understanding |
4. Therefore, a being (TWNGTCBC) ie. God, exists in the understanding
|
|
Ontological argument: statment 5-
Therefore, a being (TWNGTCBC) ie. God, exists in the understanding |
5. It is greater to exist in reality than not to exist (or it is greater to exist both in the understanding and in reality)
|
|
Ontological argument: statement 6-
It is greater to exist in reality than not to exist (or it is greater to exist both in the understanding and in reality) |
6. Therfore if God exists only in the understanding, He would not be as great as He could be (ie, He would not be a being [TWNGCBC])
|
|
Ontological argument: statement 7-
Therfore if God exists only in the understanding, He would not be as great as He could be (ie, He would not be a being [TWNGCBC]) |
7. But God is a being (TWNGCBC)
|
|
Ontological argument: statement 8-
But God is a being (TWNGCBC) |
8. Therefore, God does not exist only in the understanding.
|
|
Ontological argument: statement 9-
Therefore, God does not exist only in the understanding. |
9. Therefore, God exists in reality
|
|
Traditional objection to the ontological argument
|
The traditional objection to St. Anselm’s argument of existence is not a predicate
Distinguish between… Existential statements Subject/predicate statemtns An idea of X, X exists X is Y Ex. The table is brown Anselm treated existence as though the table was brown. If existence is not a predicate, the argument fails. (This is an objection) |