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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi. Does anyone know what the question were last year?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TeaAndTextbooks)
    Can someone explain Kants objections to the ontological argument please because I don't really understand them. Thanks

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Criticism 1 - Hypothetically speaking, Kant accepts the concept of existence belonging with the concept of God and so by default it would be self-contradictory to deny that an all-perfect being has existence. However, Kant would argue that it is not self-contradictory to deny God in the first place - just because an all-perfect being requires existence it does not follow that there is an all-perfect being in the first place.
    "To posit a triangle and yet reject it's three angles is self-contradictory; but there is no contradiction in rejecting the triangle together with it's three angles. The same holds true of the concept of an absolutely necessary being" (Critique of Pure Reason). This shows he has read Descartes' version of the Ontological Argument and is therefore a direct criticism to him.
    The idea of existence of God does belong necessarily to the concept of God but that does't mean the idea of God has to be anything more than an idea. Even if 'existence' is a predicate of God and so therefore cannot be denied, that does't mean you can't deny the subject and it's predicate together, "There is no contradiction in denying the reality of a conceptual being who has necessary existence" (Mackie, Miracle of Theism)

    Criticism 2 - Descartes makes the assumption that existence is a predicate of God, which can be included in the definition of something, for example "being married." However, Kant argues that existence cannot be a predicate of God as it adds nothing to the definition of 'God.' Kant uses an example of 100 thallers (gold coins) to support his criticism - you can imagine (in intellectus) 100 gold coins and you could see 100 gold coins in re (in reality). Both look the same and hold the same currency the only difference is one actually exists and one doesn't. When explaining what 100 gold coins is in reality you wouldn't add "it exists" in the definition and therefore existence is not a predicate.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by meeya)
    Criticism 1 - Hypothetically speaking, Kant accepts the concept of existence belonging with the concept of God and so by default it would be self-contradictory to deny that an all-perfect being has existence. However, Kant would argue that it is not self-contradictory to deny God in the first place - just because an all-perfect being requires existence it does not follow that there is an all-perfect being in the first place.
    "To posit a triangle and yet reject it's three angles is self-contradictory; but there is no contradiction in rejecting the triangle together with it's three angles. The same holds true of the concept of an absolutely necessary being" (Critique of Pure Reason). This shows he has read Descartes' version of the Ontological Argument and is therefore a direct criticism to him.
    The idea of existence of God does belong necessarily to the concept of God but that does't mean the idea of God has to be anything more than an idea. Even if 'existence' is a predicate of God and so therefore cannot be denied, that does't mean you can't deny the subject and it's predicate together, "There is no contradiction in denying the reality of a conceptual being who has necessary existence" (Mackie, Miracle of Theism)

    Criticism 2 - Descartes makes the assumption that existence is a predicate of God, which can be included in the definition of something, for example "being married." However, Kant argues that existence cannot be a predicate of God as it adds nothing to the definition of 'God.' Kant uses an example of 100 thallers (gold coins) to support his criticism - you can imagine (in intellectus) 100 gold coins and you could see 100 gold coins in re (in reality). Both look the same and hold the same currency the only difference is one actually exists and one doesn't. When explaining what 100 gold coins is in reality you wouldn't add "it exists" in the definition and therefore existence is not a predicate.
    Oh my gosh thank you soo much. I was really worried abut this but it makes so much more sense now. I really appreciate it. Thank you. I'm absolutely dreading the exam because it's so difficult to remember everything. I found this really funny criticism of the ontological argument and I just thought I'd share it because it might cheer you guys up as much as it did me. It's basically says whilst thinking about the ontological argument I imagined “Greatest Cookie Possible” - i.e the “Cookie than which no greater can exist”. I experienced an epiphany that this cookie would be even greater if it existed in the real world and not in just my imagination. In fact, it would be much better if it was right in front of me and I could eat it. As I reached to take a bite, I awoke from the false reality I had created and rather than a giant, heavenly cookie, I was back to revision and there was no cookie in sight.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    https://www.tes.com/teaching-resourc...-2015-11132492
    Just found this guys.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chocolatemoon)
    Hi. Does anyone know what the question were last year?
    Q1. a) Explain the belief that God is both lawgiver and judge
    b) 'God is not Good'. Discuss.

    Q2. a) Explain the teleological argument and Hume's criticisms of it.
    (b) ‘Hume successfully demonstrates that there is no evidence for the existence of God.’ Discuss.

    Q3. (a) Explain what Kant believed about the innate moral awareness in human beings.
    (b) ‘Moral awareness is more about guilt than God.’ Discuss.


    Q4. (a) Explain what Aristotle meant by material, efficient, formal and final causes.
    (b) To what extent was Aristotle successful in explaining the world?

    Hope this helps
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DrBossBoooky)
    Q1. a) Explain the belief that God is both lawgiver and judge
    b) 'God is not Good'. Discuss.

    Q2. a) Explain the teleological argument and Hume's criticisms of it.
    (b) ‘Hume successfully demonstrates that there is no evidence for the existence of God.’ Discuss.

    Q3. (a) Explain what Kant believed about the innate moral awareness in human beings.
    (b) ‘Moral awareness is more about guilt than God.’ Discuss.


    Q4. (a) Explain what Aristotle meant by material, efficient, formal and final causes.
    (b) To what extent was Aristotle successful in explaining the world?

    Hope this helps
    Ohh thank you so much!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone know whether the Kalam Argument could come up???
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone know how to structure this question "explain the concept of Aristotle's prime mover"
    So like the 4/5 main paragraphs
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TarotOfMagic)
    Does anyone know whether the Kalam Argument could come up???
    I would say no! But revise small on it but focus on the other main stuff
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TarotOfMagic)
    I'll be happy with a B as this is my fourth subject that I'll drop after this year. If this course didn't include ethics then I might of been able to get an A
    What are your other subjects?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iamflorence)
    Does anyone know how to structure this question "explain the concept of Aristotle's prime mover"
    So like the 4/5 main paragraphs
    Paragraph 1 = brief biography of Aristotle
    Paragraph 2 = Initial ideas about the existence of the universe and how it applies to the efficient and final cause.
    Paragraph 3 = Realisation that the universe is in a constant stage of entropy and motion
    Paragraph 4 = How the prime mover applies to God and its attributes
    Paragraph 5 = Conclusion which includes the nature of God according to Aristotle

    Good luck!

    (Original post by Iamflorence)
    I would say no! But revise small on it but focus on the other main stuff
    What are you focusing on/hoping to come up?

    (Original post by existential)
    What are your other subjects?
    Chemistry, maths and English literature but I may pick up physics next year. What about you?
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iamflorence)
    Guys, Hey i am so scared, stressed, depressed! i dont know what to do , where to start? i am going to FAIL! i know nothing, literally nthing. HELp plEASE SOMEONE
    Don't worry stay calm you won't fail truss, Philosophy isn't that bad all you need to know are the arguments, objections, and other philosophers who agree/disagree with it
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TarotOfMagic)
    Paragraph 1 = brief biography of Aristotle
    Paragraph 2 = Initial ideas about the existence of the universe and how it applies to the efficient and final cause.
    Paragraph 3 = Realisation that the universe is in a constant stage of entropy and motion
    Paragraph 4 = How the prime mover applies to God and its attributes
    Paragraph 5 = Conclusion which includes the nature of God according to Aristotle

    Good luck!



    What are you focusing on/hoping to come up?



    Chemistry, maths and English literature but I may pick up physics next year. What about you?
    French, English language and English literature. How are you feeling about English lit?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by existential)
    French, English language and English literature. How are you feeling about English lit?
    My exam board is AQA B, meaning that it is one of the linear reformed A levels, so I'm doing the exam next year.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TarotOfMagic)
    Paragraph 1 = brief biography of Aristotle
    Paragraph 2 = Initial ideas about the existence of the universe and how it applies to the efficient and final cause.
    Paragraph 3 = Realisation that the universe is in a constant stage of entropy and motion
    Paragraph 4 = How the prime mover applies to God and its attributes
    Paragraph 5 = Conclusion which includes the nature of God according to Aristotle

    Good luck!



    What are you focusing on/hoping to come up?



    Chemistry, maths and English literature but I may pick up physics next year. What about you?
    Thanks you helping me out with the prime mover! God luck too! what does entropy and motion mean?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iamflorence)
    Thanks you helping me out with the prime mover! God luck too! what does entropy and motion mean?
    Entropy = constant state of change.
    Motion = movement.

    You're welcome and good luck!
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TarotOfMagic)
    My exam board is AQA B, meaning that it is one of the linear reformed A levels, so I'm doing the exam next year.
    Yeah, mine is AQA B (linear) too but we're sitting the exam this year as a kind of 'mock' exam to get an idea for predicted grades for next year. What texts are you studying?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TarotOfMagic)
    Entropy = constant state of change.
    Motion = movement.

    You're welcome and good luck!
    What was aristotles view on the nature of God? is it the judeo christian God
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TeaAndTextbooks)
    So basically I would write the essay like this:
    Introduction: Give some context about Augustine eg he was a christian philosopher (354-430CE) ect then outline what Augustine said: "either God cannot abolish evil, or he will not: if he cannot then is is not omnipotent; if he will not then he is not omnibenevolent" (other wise known as the inconsistent triad) so this led to Augustine developing his soul deciding theodicy.
    Middle:-
    P1: Peoples response to evil decides their destiny.
    P2: God created everything
    P3: Evil is not a substance of God
    P4: Evil is a privation of Good
    P5: so evil is is not a product of God
    Therefore: there is no problem
    You can also talk about original sin and the fall from grace (genesis 2) and how it relates to Augustinian theodicy. Also don't forget to mention how Augustine believed we were "seminaly present in the loins of Adam" so evil= necessary goodness and an opportunity to absolve us of our sins
    Conclusion: summarise and address the question again
    Hope this helps. Good luck.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Thank you and I think I kind of understood it
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TeaAndTextbooks)
    So basically I would write the essay like this:
    Introduction: Give some context about Augustine eg he was a christian philosopher (354-430CE) ect then outline what Augustine said: "either God cannot abolish evil, or he will not: if he cannot then is is not omnipotent; if he will not then he is not omnibenevolent" (other wise known as the inconsistent triad) so this led to Augustine developing his soul deciding theodicy.
    Middle:-
    P1: Peoples response to evil decides their destiny.
    P2: God created everything
    P3: Evil is not a substance of God
    P4: Evil is a privation of Good
    P5: so evil is is not a product of God
    Therefore: there is no problem
    You can also talk about original sin and the fall from grace (genesis 2) and how it relates to Augustinian theodicy. Also don't forget to mention how Augustine believed we were "seminaly present in the loins of Adam" so evil= necessary goodness and an opportunity to absolve us of our sins
    Conclusion: summarise and address the question again
    Hope this helps. Good luck.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Seems well structured. But how could you manage this in 25 - 30 minutes?
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

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

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