argument)‚ and the modal argument from contingency. The main distinguishing feature between these two arguments is the way in which they evade an initial objection to the argument‚ introduced with a question: “Does God have a cause of his existence?” [Robin Le Poidevin‚ Arguing for Atheism‚ Routledge 1996‚ Chapter 1] To explain this objection‚ and how the two forms of cosmological argument evade it‚ I‘ll use a simple‚ generic statement of the cosmological argument: The Simple Cosmological Argument
Premium Cosmological argument Existence
Introduction to Philosophy Phil 100 ∙ Spring 2014 Professor Paul Burger Email paul.burger@csulb.edu Office Location MHB 805 Office Hours Tues. & Thurs. 3:30 – 4:30 PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CELL PHONE! 1. Which of the following is not part of Mill’s Principle of Utility? A. Actions are to be judged right or wrong solely in virtue of their consequences and nothing else. B. In assessing the consequences of some act‚ the only thing that matters (from an ethical point of view) is the amount of happiness
Premium Morality Ethics Human
In his article on famine‚ affluence‚ and morality‚ morally Peter Singer states that people who live in rich countries are morally obligated to ease the burden of famine and overpopulation for poorer countries. Singer states that rich countries can alleviate unnecessary suffering and death in poor countries by giving famine relief‚ and at the cost of a “morally insignificant” lessening of standard of living for the rich country. Singer also notes that this giving of famine relief should not only occur
Premium
The other animals humans eat‚ use in science‚ hunt‚ trap and exploit in a variety of other ways have a life of their own that is of importance to them‚ apart from their utility to us. They are not only in the world‚ they are aware of it and also of what happens to them. And what happens to them matters to them. Each has a life that fares experientially better or worse for the one whose life it is. Like us they bring a unified‚ psychological presence to the world. Like us they are somebodies‚ not
Free Morality Human Religion
For Aristotle‚ if something has a function then the good of that thing depends on its function‚ and I defend that the opposing objections are fallacious. As demonstrated‚ someone could try to deny that people and objects have functions to meet the same end and hold that only a higher power function “giver” can appoint functions; but Aristotle would never deny there is a cause of existence
Premium Logic Validity
been greater than it is as stated in the third premise. If God can only exist as an idea in the mind‚ then we can imagine something greater than God. But we cannot imagine something that is greater than God. Therefore‚ God exists. The first major objection was written in response called “On Behalf of the Fool” by Gaunilo. He uses Anselm’s argument by the existence of a
Premium Existence Ontology Metaphysics
understand and analyze complex philosophical texts; ➢ Improving students’ abilities to write clearly and to present arguments in a fair and precise manner; ➢ Improving students’ abilities to develop thoughtful‚ clear‚ targeted‚ and thorough objections to others’ and to their own ideas and arguments; ➢ Encouraging students to think independently about leading ethical theories. In sum‚ by the end of the term‚ successful students will have a good grasp of some leading ethical theories;
Premium Ethics Immanuel Kant Deontological ethics
concept. In the context of the text is that involuntariness is to act against one’s will‚ and ignorance is the lack of knowledge. Both of these terms are somewhat related. Objection two claims that sins imply ignorance and ignorance causes involuntariness. This leads to the idea that every sin is involuntary. The reply to objection two seems to work because the text provides examples of three kinds of ignorance: concomitant‚ consequent‚ and antecedent. This kinds of ignorance suggests that not every
Premium Logic Logic Causality
invented not discovered. The second idea is‚ “morality is nothing more than a social invention that suppresses a group’s value system‚ and this value system can vary over time and place”. In other words‚ there is no one true value system and ethical objection is wrong. The third and last idea is‚ “ethical truth is culturally relative.” In other words‚ what is really true in one culture is really true for it‚ but it may be false in other cultures. The first thing an Ethical Cultural Relativist would
Free Morality Culture Cultural relativism
that you failed. Success when it comes to the Gospel is presenting the Gospel and living out the Gospel. Fay points to the fact that it boils down to obedience. The next couple of chapters‚ Fay address the issue of not sharing the Gospel and common objections and fears that Christians have when presenting the Gospel. In Chapter 2‚ the author states that we must repent of the sin of silence. Christians‚ who never discuss the Gospel‚ instead talk
Premium Christianity Religion Jesus