Aqa RST3B A2 2016 Predictions Philosophy of Religion

Do you know what Davis says?

As i have Davis as objection to these objections of the Ontological argument

Davis is part of Platinga's response:

According to Davis, even if there exists a being with maximal excellence, and therefore this being is possible to exist in our world, this does not mean that this being actually does exist. All that we can conclude from Platinga's response is that, a being with Maximal greatness is possible, therefore God is possible.

Don't you think that Hick's Soul making theodicy will come up this year?

You could talk about how Augustine, Hick and generally the free will defence works to defend God. I wouldn't use Process as its removed from religion as the process God isn't the God of classical theism. It's like those RL questions where it asks you how religions have responded to verification but RS not a response from the religion but people who are part of the religion like Hick's eschatological verification is a response because Hick is a Christian

yes you'r right!
you could also say that:
he criticizes the use of the word 'is'. Davies stated that the word 'is' can be used in 2 different ways.
it can be used to define something: 'a queen is a female monarch'.
it can explain that there actually is something: 'there is such thing as a vampire'.

he also argues that Malcolm's error is to go from the definition of God as a being with necessary existence , to explain that there is a being with necessary
existence.
thus, the OA may help us to have a definition of God but it does not prove that being with this definition exists.

yes definitely, either Hick's theodicy or logical and evidential problem of evil!

So is that Davis' main argument really summed up:
That the ontological argument may help us structure a definition of God, but this does not actually mean that God exists.

yes i think so.

any predictions for the ontological argument??

Yeah i was thinking the same, the questions for the Logical and Evidentail problem of evil, could they be something like this:

Explain the Logical problem of evil
Explain the evidential problem of evil

and maybe how theodicies respond to it?

Im hoping just a question on explaining Anselm's argument, or just a question purely on objections to the ontological argument

Are you doing religious language?

As the second question yes.
Im really hoping Soul Making, be a bit unfair if that never came up

could you talk about Descartes and Gaunilo when doing Anselm's argumnt??
no i find religious language really hard and confusing! might do some of body soul but my main are the ontological and problem of evil.
what about you??

Only taught 3 topics.
I have feeling they could give us a question just on Language games

yeah i hope it come up as its my strongest one out of all the theodicies!
process thought is quite confusing dont u think?.

could you talk about Descartes and Gaunilo when doing Anselm's argumnt??
no i find religious language really hard and confusing! might do some of body soul but my main are the ontological and problem of evil.
what about you??

Yeah defiantly, but i don't think it will come up, as it appeared 2 years ago

And no
i think with Gaunillo you could make reference to at the end, but Descartes is another argument. Just keep it simple

is this correct for Alvin Platinga 'Possible Worlds" which supports Ontological Argument:

- Alvin Platinga developed the notion of possible worlds
- He offers the description of a possible world where there exists a being with 'maximal greatness'.
- A being can only have 'maximal greatness' if it exists in all possible worlds.
- However, this does not mean God, as Platinga maintained that for a being to be maximally great, it must exist within all possible worlds.
- According to Davis, even if we accept that there exists a being with maximal greatness, and therefore this being has the possibility to exists in our world, this does not mean that this being actually exists.
- Therefore, all that is signifiant within Platinga's response is the element possibility. Platinga argues that a being with 'maximal greatness is possible'.
- Therefore God is possible.

you could also say that Plantinga introduces the idea of 'maximal excllence'. he states that
-maximal greatness entails maximal excellence
-maximal excellence entails omnitpotence, omniscience and moral perfection.
therefore
-there is a possible world in whcih there is a being that is maximally great.
- it has maximal excellence
-if omnipoetent, omniscience and morally perfect, and maximally great, it is exsitent in our world
-therefore, there is a God.