Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jackf1998)
    How would others approach the part b; 'Assess Gaunilo’s challenge to Anselm.' It is predicted herehttp://peped.org/philosophicalinvestigations/predictions-philosophy-religion-a2-2016/ and is one of those tricky part b's which aren't very clear on what to talk about.
    -
    I would first briefly explain the ontological argument in tue introduction with anselm ans guanilos dates.
    Para 1. Put good thing that guanilo said eg. Its logical that just thinking if an island wont make it exist. Then criticise it e.g. God cannot be compared to an island like anselm said.
    Para 2. Another critism eg. Island depends on otuer factor for its existence whereas god existence us necessary then put a strength e.g.im not sure
    Thats what id do if i was stuck in an exam because i really have no clue but i tried x
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Hmm, is the question asking you to show that the conclusion of his challenge is correct? If so you can use the other criticisms of the OA- Kant, Frege, Russell etc but am not sure if they are valid in this circumstance
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by existential)
    You could get an explain one with a criticisms one I've been told
    Yeah, thought so
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jackf1998)
    How would others approach the part b; 'Assess Gaunilo’s challenge to Anselm.' It is predicted herehttp://peped.org/philosophicalinvestigations/predictions-philosophy-religion-a2-2016/ and is one of those tricky part b's which aren't very clear on what to talk about.
    -
    I did this question and got 8/10 on it so feel free to private message me if you need any help with it


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VivekJ555)
    Honestly, I think these 25 markers will come up

    1) Explain Plato's theory of forms (25)

    2) Explain the Ontological Argument AND Kant's challenges of it (25)

    3) Explain the concept of God as Creator (25)

    4) Explain Augustine's theodicy on the problem of evil (25)

    Hume and his cosmological argument have come up quite often since the beginning of the spec - I don't think it'll come up.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Kant isn't on the spec for ontological


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bilalnaseerr)
    Kant isn't on the spec for ontological


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    My bad


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Everyone talking about Kant's moral argument makes me scared, because my teacher decided not to include it. She was sure it wouldn't come up because it was used last year. I don't know the first thing about it

    On the other hand, I've got a killer Plato essay lined up, having researched him so much. I have more additional knowledge about him and his Forms than you would ever need.

    Other topics that worry me:

    - Religion and science (Again, my teacher told us not to do it in an exam. I haven't revised it)
    - Kant's criticisms of the Ontological Argument (we only learnt about the Predicate idea, not the analytical/synthetic statement bit)
    - Comparison of PM/Demiurge to Judeo-Christian God (we learnt about each one, but haven't compared them)
    - Creation ex-nihilo (What can you write about?)
    - Coplestone/Russell debate (I know all about the cosmological argument but their debate was short and very vague. Difficult to write 25 marks on)

    Would someone be able to clarify what synthetic and analytical statements are, and how they are used in the course overall?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bilalnaseerr)
    Kant isn't on the spec for ontological


    Posted from TSR Mobile

    June 2011
    "Explain Kant's challenges to the ontological argument (25)"
    Look it up. It's on the spec. This question has been asked before and is long due to come up.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    BUMP.

    Honestly, I think these 25 markers will come up

    1) Explain Plato's theory of forms (25)

    2) Explain the Ontological Argument AND Kant's challenges of it (25)

    3) Explain the concept of God as Creator (25)

    4) Explain Augustine's theodicy on the problem of evil (25)

    Hume and his cosmological argument have come up quite often since the beginning of the spec - I don't think it'll come up.





    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Posted from TSR Mobile[/QUOTE]




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=nihil_nimis;64860635]
    (Original post by Azzurah)

    I agree , although moral argument came up last year I believe so I doubt it will come up, I think it will be either Plato or religion and science, creatio ex nihilo, ontological and the problem of evil
    Where did you get those predictions from?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi does anyone think that John hicks version of ireanus theodicy will come up, is it worth revising
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lanterne Rouge)
    Everyone talking about Kant's moral argument makes me scared, because my teacher decided not to include it. She was sure it wouldn't come up because it was used last year. I don't know the first thing about it

    On the other hand, I've got a killer Plato essay lined up, having researched him so much. I have more additional knowledge about him and his Forms than you would ever need.

    Other topics that worry me:

    - Religion and science (Again, my teacher told us not to do it in an exam. I haven't revised it)
    - Kant's criticisms of the Ontological Argument (we only learnt about the Predicate idea, not the analytical/synthetic statement bit)
    - Comparison of PM/Demiurge to Judeo-Christian God (we learnt about each one, but haven't compared them)
    - Creation ex-nihilo (What can you write about?)
    - Coplestone/Russell debate (I know all about the cosmological argument but their debate was short and very vague. Difficult to write 25 marks on)

    Would someone be able to clarify what synthetic and analytical statements are, and how they are used in the course overall?
    Kant differentiated between analytic and synthetic statements.
    Kant argued that analytic statements are true by definition - there is no need for evidence - we know it is true by the very definition of the words eg) All bachelors are unmarried". We know this because the definition of bachelor, is indeed one who is unmarried.
    Synthetic statements require evidence to confirm that the statement is true ie) the car is red. You will visibly have to see the car to confirm that it is, indeed red.
    Kant argued that existence is not a predicate - a predicate is an attribute or given property to something
    Ie) Triangles have three sides and it exists. The subject is triangles. The predicate is that it has 3 sides. The predicate has to tell us something more about the subject. Saying 'and it exists ' does not tell us anything more about triangles - we can also figure they exist because we are talking about it already. Saying it exists does not tell us anything more and therefore to say 'and it exists' is not a predicate. Kant says that existence is not a predicate.

    Kant criticises the ontological argument.
    He states that "God exists" is not an analytical statement. We need to have evidence that God exists. This argument is prior and is deductive, meaning it uses logic rather then relying on our senses. Thus, Kant argues that we cannot say God exists as there is no evidence to support it. "God has necessary existence" is synthetic statement. Kant uses logic to criticise Anselm and Descartes' view on the existence of God.

    Just to remind you:
    Anselm: nothing greater can be conceived. The idea that it's better for God to exist in the mind and reality rather than just the mind.

    Contingency: God is not dependant on anything else for his existence: if he was; then he is not the greatest being

    Descartes: God is perfection. The most perfect being; he is omnipotent, omniscience. For Descartes, just like a triangle has to have 3 sides, God has to exist - there is no if's or but's. God has necessary existence. (yes, before you ask, Descartes basically compares God to a triangle) For Descartes, existence is perfection. God is perfection; therefore he exists.

    People who agree with Anselm and Descartes are Norman Malcolm and Alvin Plantinga.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone think that science and religion is gonna come up as it hasnt in like 3/4 years?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VivekJ555)
    Kant differentiated between analytic and synthetic statements.
    Kant argued that analytic statements are true by definition - there is no need for evidence - we know it is true by the very definition of the words eg) All bachelors are unmarried". We know this because the definition of bachelor, is indeed one who is unmarried.
    Synthetic statements require evidence to confirm that the statement is true ie) the car is red. You will visibly have to see the car to confirm that it is, indeed red.
    Kant argued that existence is not a predicate - a predicate is an attribute or given property to something
    Ie) Triangles have three sides and it exists. The subject is triangles. The predicate is that it has 3 sides. The predicate has to tell us something more about the subject. Saying 'and it exists ' does not tell us anything more about triangles - we can also figure they exist because we are talking about it already. Saying it exists does not tell us anything more and therefore to say 'and it exists' is not a predicate. Kant says that existence is not a predicate.

    Kant criticises the ontological argument.
    He states that "God exists" is not an analytical statement. We need to have evidence that God exists. This argument is prior and is deductive, meaning it uses logic rather then relying on our senses. Thus, Kant argues that we cannot say God exists as there is no evidence to support it. "God has necessary existence" is synthetic statement. Kant uses logic to criticise Anselm and Descartes' view on the existence of God.

    Just to remind you:
    Anselm: nothing greater can be conceived. The idea that it's better for God to exist in the mind and reality rather than just the mind.

    Contingency: God is not dependant on anything else for his existence: if he was; then he is not the greatest being

    Descartes: God is perfection. The most perfect being; he is omnipotent, omniscience. For Descartes, just like a triangle has to have 3 sides, God has to exist - there is no if's or but's. God has necessary existence. (yes, before you ask, Descartes basically compares God to a triangle) For Descartes, existence is perfection. God is perfection; therefore he exists.

    People who agree with Anselm and Descartes are Norman Malcolm and Alvin Plantinga.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Just awesome !
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    This may sound ridiculous but how do you answer a part A question? For example, if you got "explain the concept/theory of blah blah", are you supposed to evaluate (strengths/weaknesses) or what?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThatGuyJosh)
    Just awesome !
    Haha cheers Josh


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Louise12307)
    This may sound ridiculous but how do you answer a part A question? For example, if you got "explain the concept/theory of blah blah", are you supposed to evaluate (strengths/weaknesses) or what?
    Introduction:
    Explain what the theory is in 1 sentence by explaining the philosopher.
    "Plato is an Ancient Greek philosopher who developed an analogy to represent his idea that our world is not as it seems. An analogy is a story that has a metaphorical meaning. He lived between "...".. The analogy is in light of a cave and represents the physical world that we live in today...

    Then you explain the theory (in this case the cave)

    Explaining the theory should be done in about 4-5 paragraphs
    -Make sure after you explain each part of his analogy you explain what it represents eg) chained prisoners represent the rest of humanity
    Name drop scholars: Socrates - Plato's teacher
    Use quotes do support your paragraphs - refer to Plato's republic

    Conclusion:
    In conclusion, Plato uses the analogy of the cave to represent the world of sense experience and states that we, as human intellectuals need to reach enlightenment by discovering true reality and knowledge in the eternal and unchanging world of forms.

    So to summarise

    Intro - (include key words)
    4-5 paragraphs
    Conclusion

    Bang. 25/25


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VivekJ555)
    Honestly, I think these 25 markers will come up

    1) Explain Plato's theory of forms (25)

    2) Explain the Ontological Argument AND Kant's challenges of it (25)

    3) Explain the concept of God as Creator (25)

    4) Explain Augustine's theodicy on the problem of evil (25)

    Hume and his cosmological argument have come up quite often since the beginning of the spec - I don't think it'll come up.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    hmm. i agree with the topics but not the questions at all. if plato comes up it wont be as simple to explain the forms. thats too easy and its the last year. they can ask us like "explain the criticisms of platonic forms" or something of that nature. for ontological, i dont think it will be kant. he already came up as a 25 marker previously on his own so i doubt they will ask him with anselm/descartes coz thats making it easier. for god as a creator, that question is to vague. i think it will more specific like explain god as a craftsman. the only one i agree with u is the last one on augustine. but iraneus is somewhat harder so who knows. remember this is the last year of this spec. be ready for some difficult wording.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lanterne Rouge)
    Everyone talking about Kant's moral argument makes me scared, because my teacher decided not to include it. She was sure it wouldn't come up because it was used last year. I don't know the first thing about it

    On the other hand, I've got a killer Plato essay lined up, having researched him so much. I have more additional knowledge about him and his Forms than you would ever need.

    Other topics that worry me:

    - Religion and science (Again, my teacher told us not to do it in an exam. I haven't revised it)
    - Kant's criticisms of the Ontological Argument (we only learnt about the Predicate idea, not the analytical/synthetic statement bit)
    - Comparison of PM/Demiurge to Judeo-Christian God (we learnt about each one, but haven't compared them)
    - Creation ex-nihilo (What can you write about?)
    - Coplestone/Russell debate (I know all about the cosmological argument but their debate was short and very vague. Difficult to write 25 marks on)

    Would someone be able to clarify what synthetic and analytical statements are, and how they are used in the course overall?

    Hi, if you want to know more about kants challenges to the ontological argument, watch videos on YouTube by a guy called mrmcmillanrevis as he will explain the argument and go through kants critisms as well.
    For the comparison of the demiurge, pm and jueo Christian god, copleston and russells radio debate and essay on creatio ex nihlo, message me and i am able to send pictures of my notes later x
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    So how are people going about revision today?

    Rep this if you are also wondering, because I want to see people's answers.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.