Ok, so I was originally going to do my Extended Project Qualification on the strength of atheistic arguments against the existence of the God of Classical Theism, but when I submitted my title to my supervisor I was told it was too broad. I am now considering focussing on the contribution of individuals, perhaps St Thomas Aquinas or Bertrand Russell, but am having difficulty coming up with a title that is narrow enough, yet also broad enough to allow an in-depth discussion. Does anyone have any suggestions/examples of past questions on this topic that allow the right amount of focus?
You are Here: Home > Forums >< Study Help >< Arts and humanities academic help >< Philosophy, religious studies and theology study help
Philosophy of Religion EPQ Title Watch
- Thread Starter
- 18-07-2014 15:03
- 19-07-2014 15:10
While you're waiting for an answer, did you know we have 300,000 study resources that could answer your question in TSR's Learn together section?
We have everything from Teacher Marked Essays to Mindmaps and Quizzes to help you with your work. Take a look around.
If you're stuck on how to get started, try creating some resources. It's free to do and can help breakdown tough topics into manageable chunks. Get creating now.
Not sure what all of this is about? Head here to find out more.
- 08-08-2014 11:50
Hello, I have been creating such titles for others and completed my own EPQ last year and got an A* (mine was on if it's fair to deem people 'good and evil' using Henry VIII as a case study).
A couple of suggestions:
'_________ provides the best argument to issues surrounding the existence of God'. Here you can replace with whichever philosopher you like. This would be good as there would be focus on one but great scope as you can bring in many different ones to say it is or is not the best. I would say fill the '_____' with David Hume, Thomas Aquinas or Richard Dawkins, although of course if there is someone you prefer that would be fine (Paley, Freud, Kant, Russell etc... would all work).
Use a quote from a philosopher and then do a critical assessment; for example...
"The whole thing is so patently infantile, so foreign to reality, that to anyone with a friendly attitude to humanity it is painful to think that the great majority of mortals will never be able to rise above this view of life." To what extent can Freud's view of religion and God be said accurate?
"Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.". To what extent is Dawkins right in suggesting that it is a 'cop-out' to believe in God?
"“Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning...”. To what extent is C.S Lewis correct in suggesting that atheism is weaker than theism?
You could do a critical comparison style question. For example:
'Freud succeeds where Kant fails, God is nothing more than a delusion'. To what extent is this statement correct
'To what extent is it accurate to say that Hume's argument against God defeats those proposed by Thomas Aquinas?'
Finally... you could take a different approach examining perhaps a theme, for example....
'Aristotle was correct in suggesting that God was the Prime Mover, there was never any need for God'
'Modern society requires atheism, we now realize it stands stronger than theism'
I hope this helps, please feel free to ask any more questions if required