philosophy final notes

philosophy final notes - Anders Moller barn swallows Hume....

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Anders Moller – barn swallows Hume…. Empiricist, evidentialist Ontological argument (Demea) Cause/effect (exists only in human mind… creation then not necessity and only human concept, not reality) Demea (religious Orthodoxy) Demea argues for the position of religious Orthodoxy, and insists that we cannot possibly come to know the nature of God through reason. He believes, in fact, that we cannot ever know the nature of God at all because God's nature is inherently beyond the capacity of human comprehension. Philo (philosophical skeptic) Philo, the philosophical skeptic, agrees with Demea that God is incomprehensible and provides the most convincing arguments for this position. - argument by design – faulty analogy - just because world is ordered – not necessarily result of intelligent design - inductive argument – requires repeated experience, which God/universe lacks - god is intelligent designer – does not say anything about why world is ordered - argument from design – can’t infer what we want to infer - argument by analogy – random analogies - god’s morality – neutral? - fideist – philosophical skepticism to Christianity - revelation
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/07/2008 for the course PHIL 003 taught by Professor Erikson during the Fall '07 term at Claremont.

Page1 / 2

philosophy final notes - Anders Moller barn swallows Hume....

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online