Lecture 16: The Existence of God

LECTURE 16: THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

TODAY’S LECTURE

In Today’s Lecture we will:In Today’s Lecture we will:

1.1.Read and discuss Nietzsche’s ‘Parable of the Madman’Read and discuss Nietzsche’s ‘Parable of the Madman’

2.2.Begin our investigation into the Philosophy of ReligionBegin our investigation into the Philosophy of Religion

3.3.Explore a number of preliminary perspectives on ReligionExplore a number of preliminary perspectives on Religion

4.4.Investigate and discuss the Cosmological argument for God’s Investigate and discuss the Cosmological argument for God’s existenceexistence

TOPIC 4: PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION

RULES

Rules for discussing philosophy:Rules for discussing philosophy:

1.1.No No Ad Hominem Ad Hominem (personal attacks)(personal attacks)

2.2.Try to remain open-minded and look at both sides of the argumentsTry to remain open-minded and look at both sides of the arguments

3.3.No passing judgements on a person for their beliefsNo passing judgements on a person for their beliefs

4.4.Remember! if there is a disagreement there is room for Remember! if there is a disagreement there is room for healthyhealthy debate debate

5.5.Listen and keep discussions relevant, respectful and friendlyListen and keep discussions relevant, respectful and friendly

6.6.Be respectful!Be respectful!

PRE-DISCUSSION

Q: Why should we be interested in discussing religion philosophically?Q: Why should we be interested in discussing religion philosophically?

How would Nietzsche’s Madman answer this question? (Handout)How would Nietzsche’s Madman answer this question? (Handout)

1.1. Does the Madman think God’s existence is important?Does the Madman think God’s existence is important?

2.2. Who is the Madman’s message aimed towards?Who is the Madman’s message aimed towards?

3.3. What are the implications of God’s death?What are the implications of God’s death?

4.4. Who does God’s death effect?Who does God’s death effect?

5.5. What is the overall point of the Madman’s speech?What is the overall point of the Madman’s speech?

6.6. What kind of arguments/observations does the Madman make? What kind of arguments/observations does the Madman make?

(are they based on reason or myth?)(are they based on reason or myth?)

KEY QUESTIONS

Key Questions in the Philosophy of Religion:

o Are there any good reasons for believing in God’s existence or Are there any good reasons for believing in God’s existence or

nonexistence?nonexistence?

o What kind of God exists or does not exist?What kind of God exists or does not exist?

o What are the implications of Gods existence or nonexistence for What are the implications of Gods existence or nonexistence for

humans?humans?

o Can we reconcile the concept of God with evil in the world?Can we reconcile the concept of God with evil in the world?

o What is the nature of religious belief?What is the nature of religious belief?

o How does philosophical knowledge of God relate to divine revelation?How does philosophical knowledge of God relate to divine revelation?

o What is the relationship, if any, between faith and reason?What is the relationship, if any, between faith and reason?

o What is the relationship between religion, science and philosophy?What is the relationship between religion, science and philosophy?

o What are the special features of religious language?What are the special features of religious language?

PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION

Putting the ‘Philosophy’ into the Philosophy of ReligionPutting the ‘Philosophy’ into the Philosophy of Religion

Does God exist?Does God exist?

How should we investigate such a claim?How should we investigate such a claim?

Natural TheologyRevealed Theology

Knowledge of God through special revelation

Knowledge of God through the natural intellect

RationalismRationalism

““The view that affirms The view that affirms reasonreason, with its , with its interest in interest in evidenceevidence, , examinationexamination, ,

and and evaluationevaluation, as authoritative in all , as authoritative in all matters of belief and conduct”matters of belief and conduct”

((Miller, Ed L. Questions that Matter, 2009. p.10))

The BibleThe BibleMystical ExperienceMystical ExperienceThe ChurchThe ChurchMosesMosesThe Holy SpiritThe Holy Spirit

TWO PERSPECTIVES

Can we know God rationally?

Natural theology does not exist as an entity capable of becoming a separate subject within what I consider to be real theology – not even

for the sake of being rejected. If one occupies oneself with real theology one can pass by so-called natural theology only as one

would pass by an abyss into which it is inadvisable to step if one does not want to fall. All one can do is turn one’s back upon it as upon the great temptation and source of error, by having nothing to do with it

-Karl Barth-“No!” in Emil Brunner and Karl Barth, Natural Theology (Eugene, OR:Wipf and Stock, 2002) p. 75. “No!” in Emil Brunner and Karl Barth, Natural Theology (Eugene, OR:Wipf and Stock, 2002) p. 75.

TWO PERSPECTIVES

Can we know God rationally?

As a scientist, I am hostile to fundamentalist religion because it actively debauches the scientific enterprise. It teaches us not to change our

minds, and not to want to know exciting things that are available to be known. It subverts science and saps the intellect.[...] the Kurt Wise

story* is just plain pathetic - pathetic and contemptible. The wound, to his career and his life's happiness, was self-inflicted, so unnecessary, so easy to escape. All he had to do was toss out the bible. Or interpret it

symbolically, or allegorically, as the theologians do. Instead, he did the fundamentalist thing and tossed out science, evidence and reason,

along with all his dreams and hopes.

-Richard Dawkins-The God Delusion, pp.284-285

* When faced with the choice between Evolution or Scripture, Kurt Wise chose creationism. By Dawkin’s portrayal this makes Wise a fundamentalist.

THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT


1.1. Here is the world, or space and time.Here is the world, or space and time.

2.2. It could not be the cause of itself.It could not be the cause of itself.

3.3. It could not come from nothing.It could not come from nothing.

4.4. It could not be an effect in an infinite series of causes and effectsIt could not be an effect in an infinite series of causes and effects

5.5. Therefore, it must be caused by something outside space and time, Therefore, it must be caused by something outside space and time,

something uncaused and ultimatesomething uncaused and ultimate

Version 1Version 1


1.1. Every event in the observable world is caused by some event prior Every event in the observable world is caused by some event prior

to it.to it.

2.2. Either (a) the series of causes is infinite, or (b) the series of causes Either (a) the series of causes is infinite, or (b) the series of causes

goes back to a first cause, which is itself uncaused.goes back to a first cause, which is itself uncaused.

3.3. But an infinite series of events is impossibleBut an infinite series of events is impossible

4.4. Therefore, A first cause exists outside the observable world; this Therefore, A first cause exists outside the observable world; this

first cause is God.first cause is God.

Version 2Version 2


All contingent (or caused) being depends for its existence on some All contingent (or caused) being depends for its existence on some

uncaused being.uncaused being.

The cosmos is a contingent being.The cosmos is a contingent being.

Therefore, the cosmos depends for its existence on some uncaused Therefore, the cosmos depends for its existence on some uncaused

being.being.

All VersionsAll Versions

COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

Key Features of the Cosmological argument:Key Features of the Cosmological argument:

Argues that the universe must have a beginning outside of itselfArgues that the universe must have a beginning outside of itself

oBegins with an Begins with an a posteriori a posteriori observationobservation

oUses a process of elimination to find the only possible explanation for Uses a process of elimination to find the only possible explanation for this observationthis observation

oBegins with a contingent fact and results in a logically necessary truthBegins with a contingent fact and results in a logically necessary truth

oArgument is based entirely on logic and reasonArgument is based entirely on logic and reason


Key Features of the Cosmological argument (continued)Key Features of the Cosmological argument (continued)

Argues that the universe must have a beginning outside of itselfArgues that the universe must have a beginning outside of itself

oVersion 1 argues:Version 1 argues:

The universe may be infinite, and every moment of existence depends The universe may be infinite, and every moment of existence depends on an ultimate cause; God.on an ultimate cause; God.

oVersion 2 argues:Version 2 argues:

The universe is not infinite, therefore it must have a beginning outside The universe is not infinite, therefore it must have a beginning outside of itself: which must be Godof itself: which must be God


St. Thomas Aquinas’ arguments (textbook, pp.252-255)St. Thomas Aquinas’ arguments (textbook, pp.252-255)

1.1.The argument from motionThe argument from motion

2.2.The nature of ‘efficient cause’The nature of ‘efficient cause’

3.3.Possibility and necessityPossibility and necessity

4.4.GradationGradation

5.5.Governance of the worldGovernance of the world


1.1. Here is the world, or Here is the world, or space and time.space and time.

2.2. It could not be the cause It could not be the cause of itself.of itself.

3.3. It could not come from It could not come from nothing.nothing.

4.4. It could not be an effect It could not be an effect in an infinite series of in an infinite series of causes and effectscauses and effects

5.5. Therefore, it must be Therefore, it must be caused by something caused by something outside space and time, outside space and time, something uncaused and something uncaused and ultimateultimate

1.1. Every event in the observable Every event in the observable world is caused by some event world is caused by some event prior to it.prior to it.

2.2. Either (a) the series of causes Either (a) the series of causes is infinite, or (b) the series of is infinite, or (b) the series of causes goes back to a first causes goes back to a first cause, which is itself uncaused.cause, which is itself uncaused.

3.3. But an infinite series of events But an infinite series of events is impossibleis impossible

4.4. Therefore, A first cause exists Therefore, A first cause exists outside the observable world; outside the observable world; this first cause is God.this first cause is God.

Version 1 Version 2

All contingent (or caused) being depends for its existence on some uncaused All contingent (or caused) being depends for its existence on some uncaused

being.being.

The cosmos is a contingent being.The cosmos is a contingent being.

Therefore, the cosmos depends for its existence on some uncaused being.Therefore, the cosmos depends for its existence on some uncaused being.


CriticismsCriticisms

Hume: Is there any need for a beginning of a series of causes?Hume: Is there any need for a beginning of a series of causes?

It cannot be proved It cannot be proved a priori a priori that every event has a causethat every event has a cause

Suggests that the concepts of beginning, middle, end may be Suggests that the concepts of beginning, middle, end may be entirely humanentirely human

We can always imagine an earlier eventWe can always imagine an earlier event

See Hume, David. See Hume, David. Dialogues concerning Natural Religion Dialogues concerning Natural Religion (New York: (New York: Hafner, 1960)Hafner, 1960)

Lecture 16: The Existence of God

Documents

Transcript of Lecture 16: The Existence of God