PHL 201 Problems of PHL 201 Problems of PhilosophyPhilosophy

March 25March 25thth

Chapter Five, ‘God’Chapter Five, ‘God’

OverviewOverview

1.1. Faith that God exists vs. Justified Faith that God exists vs. Justified Belief that God existsBelief that God exists

2.2. The concept of GodThe concept of God3.3. The Ontological ArgumentThe Ontological Argument4.4. The First-Cause ArgumentThe First-Cause Argument5.5. The Argument from DesignThe Argument from Design6.6. The Evidence of MiraclesThe Evidence of Miracles7.7. The Utility of Belief in GodThe Utility of Belief in God8.8. The Problem of EvilThe Problem of Evil

Faith that God exists vs. Faith that God exists vs. Justified Belief that God Justified Belief that God

existsexists

Should religious claims (e.g. Should religious claims (e.g. “There is a God”) be assessed in “There is a God”) be assessed in terms of truth and falsehood?terms of truth and falsehood?

Can we find some Can we find some reasonreason to to believe that God exists?believe that God exists?

FideismFideism: The view that religious : The view that religious belief is based on faith, not on belief is based on faith, not on reasonreason

The Concept of GodThe Concept of God

Different cultures and religions offer quite Different cultures and religions offer quite different conceptions of God or Godsdifferent conceptions of God or Gods

The conception that interests Blackburn is The conception that interests Blackburn is shared by Judaism, Christianity, and Islamshared by Judaism, Christianity, and Islam

God’s principal attributes (perfections) God’s principal attributes (perfections) are:are:

-Omnipotence (all-powerful)-Omnipotence (all-powerful)

-Omniscience (all-knowing)-Omniscience (all-knowing)

- Goodness (all-good)- Goodness (all-good)

The Ontological The Ontological ArgumentArgument

In his In his MeditationsMeditations, Descartes offers , Descartes offers several arguments for the existence of several arguments for the existence of GodGod

TheThe TrademarkTrademark ArgumentArgument A version of A version of The Ontological ArgumentThe Ontological Argument::1.1. All perfections are properties of the All perfections are properties of the

Supreme Being.Supreme Being.2.2. Existence is a perfection.Existence is a perfection.Therefore,Therefore,3.3. The Supreme Being has existence – i.e. The Supreme Being has existence – i.e.

God exists.God exists.

The Ontological The Ontological ArgumentArgument

A version of Descartes’ argument was A version of Descartes’ argument was offered by an earlier offered by an earlier philosopher/theologian, St. Anselm (1033-philosopher/theologian, St. Anselm (1033-1109). The argument has 2 parts.1109). The argument has 2 parts.

Part 1:Part 1:1.1. The concept of God (the being with ALL The concept of God (the being with ALL

perfections) is understood.perfections) is understood.2.2. Whatever is understood exists in our Whatever is understood exists in our

minds.minds.Therefore,Therefore,3.3. God exists in our minds.God exists in our minds.

Part 2:Part 2:4.4. Suppose God exists Suppose God exists onlyonly in our minds, in our minds,

and not in reality.and not in reality.5.5. Then we can conceive of a being Then we can conceive of a being

greatergreater than God – one that really than God – one that really exists.exists.

6.6. But “God” is defined as “that being But “God” is defined as “that being than which nothing greater can be than which nothing greater can be conceived”.conceived”.

7.7. So, no greater being can be conceived.So, no greater being can be conceived.8.8. But this contradicts our supposition (4) But this contradicts our supposition (4)

that God exists only in our minds.that God exists only in our minds.Therefore,Therefore,9.9. Our supposition that God exists only in Our supposition that God exists only in

our minds is false – i.e. God exists our minds is false – i.e. God exists outside of our minds.outside of our minds.

Is this a sound argument?Is this a sound argument?

Some things to wonder about:Some things to wonder about: Is “existence” really a predicate?Is “existence” really a predicate? Is existence a perfection?Is existence a perfection? Does the argument allow us to Does the argument allow us to

prove too much? prove too much?

- The Proof that Dreamboat - The Proof that Dreamboat exists (exists (Think, Think, p.156)p.156)

4.4. Does it make sense to compare Does it make sense to compare things that exist in reality with things that exist in reality with things that exist in the mind? things that exist in the mind? ((ThinkThink, pp. 157-158), pp. 157-158)

The First-Cause The First-Cause ArgumentArgument

1.1. There are now things changing and There are now things changing and causing change.causing change.

2.2. Something causes change only if it is Something causes change only if it is caused to change by something else.caused to change by something else.

3.3. If something causes change only if it is If something causes change only if it is caused to change by something else, then caused to change by something else, then its its causal chaincausal chain is infinitely long. is infinitely long.

4.4. But no causal chain is infinitely long.But no causal chain is infinitely long.Therefore,Therefore,5.5. There is something that causes change, There is something that causes change,

but is not caused to change by something but is not caused to change by something else – i.e. there is a first-cause and it is else – i.e. there is a first-cause and it is God.God.

Is this a sound argument?Is this a sound argument?Some things to wonder about:Some things to wonder about:

Why can’t there be an infinitely Why can’t there be an infinitely long series of causes and effects?long series of causes and effects?

Why think that the first-cause, if Why think that the first-cause, if there was one, must still exist?there was one, must still exist?

Why think that the first-cause, if Why think that the first-cause, if there was one, is God?there was one, is God?

If God requires no cause in order If God requires no cause in order to change or cause change, then to change or cause change, then why not just stop with the why not just stop with the physical world?physical world?

The Argument from The Argument from DesignDesign

Based on an analogy: The universe, as an Based on an analogy: The universe, as an ordered structure, resembles (or is ordered structure, resembles (or is analogous to) a mechanism (e.g. a analogous to) a mechanism (e.g. a watch)watch)

1.1. The universe is like a mechanism.The universe is like a mechanism.2.2. Like effects have like causes.Like effects have like causes.3.3. The cause of a mechanism is an The cause of a mechanism is an

intelligent being.intelligent being.Therefore, probablyTherefore, probably4.4. The cause of the universe is an The cause of the universe is an

intelligent being.intelligent being.5.5. This cause is God (“The Wise Architect”)This cause is God (“The Wise Architect”)

Is this a cogent argument?Is this a cogent argument?

Some things to wonder about:Some things to wonder about:

Is the analogy a good one?Is the analogy a good one? Why think that the designer, if Why think that the designer, if

there was one, must still exist?there was one, must still exist? Why think that the designer, if Why think that the designer, if

there was one, is God?there was one, is God? Are there other hypotheses that Are there other hypotheses that

would explain the existence of would explain the existence of order in the universe? order in the universe?

The Evidence of MiraclesThe Evidence of Miracles1.1. Some people report having witnessed Some people report having witnessed

or experienced miracles.or experienced miracles.2.2. Miracles, if they exist, are violations Miracles, if they exist, are violations

of natural regularities and natural of natural regularities and natural laws.laws.

3.3. If miracles occur, then probably there If miracles occur, then probably there is a God.is a God.

Therefore,Therefore,4.4. There is some evidence (i.e. the There is some evidence (i.e. the

testimony of those who report testimony of those who report miracles) that probably there is a miracles) that probably there is a God.God.

Is this a cogent argument?Is this a cogent argument?

David Hume’s Objection:David Hume’s Objection: Suppose Jones offers a report, Suppose Jones offers a report, RR, that a , that a

miracle occurred.miracle occurred. R is, of course, very improbable (because R is, of course, very improbable (because

miracles are very improbable).miracles are very improbable).

Considering the following 2 possibilities, we Considering the following 2 possibilities, we should should rejectreject the one that is the one that is leastleast probable:probable:

(a) Jones reports (a) Jones reports RR, but , but R R did not actually did not actually happen.happen.

(b) Jones reports (b) Jones reports RR, and , and R R actually occurred.actually occurred.

But, clearly, the least likely of these options But, clearly, the least likely of these options is the (b). So we should believe (a). (see is the (b). So we should believe (a). (see Think, Think, pp. 179-180)pp. 179-180)