Response To Pp. 121-162 Intro To Philosophy

Payton Roth
Dr. Dillbeck
23 September 2021
PHI 1010
Religion has had a profound effect on people’s thinking including their philosophical outlook with regards
to epistemology, ethics and metaphysics. There is a direct connection between philosophy and religion- something
that can be seen historically. But it is difficult to identify that connection between the two. At the least though they
are linked by religious belief which has to do with one’s orientation- are you agnostic, atheist, or theist? Philosophy
and religion converge quite clearly here. As for a definition of religion John Wisdom claims it is your way of looking
at the world. People can sometimes observe the same things yet come to completely opposite conclusions. One of
the big fields that plays into this as well is science. Which can be seen to certainly influence each other. Science can
influence the way you view the world just as the way you look at the world (religion) can drive you to study the
natural world and shape what you see in it. Keiji Nishitani defines religion as a necessity, not a luxury. He claims
that everything flows out of the question of how it relates to you, but that religion is different—it asks the question
where do I stand in the cosmic scheme and for what purpose am I here? And it is for this reason that it is essential
(as opposed to other learning or another subject).
Now we move to discuss western religions within this framework. The Abrahamic religions, as they are
called, are the big ones- Christianity, Judaism and Islam. There is some variability in them but the conception of
God as an independent and transcendent being that is non- anthropomorphic (though often understood in terms
of human emotions) but also as a feeling being that is not simply an idea, or a force is in common among all of
them. Far more could be said but that is for the subject matter of many books.
In terms of proving God there is 3 arguments- 1.) the ontological argument; 2.) cosmological argument;
and 3.) the teleological argument. The ontological argument is attributed to St. Anselm who argued with pure logic
his necessary existence which is a concept Descartes modernized in saying that his existence is part of his essence
and so therefore cannot exist purely within one’s own mind but must exist in reality. Immanuel Kant questioned
Descartes idea that existence is part of his essence and purported that analytical logic itself doesn’t prove
existence. A more contemporary argument arises with Charles Hartshorne. This argument itself has very little
power in terms of convincing others but is an excellent exercise in logic. For this reason, it is of little value for
proving God’s existence in that it makes no use of evidence. Perhaps the logic in it paired with other arguments
would be of some use.
The cosmological argument has to do with 1st causes- an argument still being used today. This began with
Aristotle and this argument focuses primarily on arguing for creation as proof for God’s existence. St Thomas
Aquinas touches on important aspects of this- such as motion, cause and effect, and possibility and actuality which
attempt to bring us to a first cause- something eternal—God. The concept of the specific nature of God cannot be
defined in this argument it seems though. The teleological argument is similar to this one. It points to the fine-
tuned complexity of life seen in organisms and mechanisms (like the place and rotation of the planets) and water
and its essentiality in properties for all life. Evolution has been the biggest counter argument to this. The
multiverse has also been proposed as a possible explanation for the fine tuning of the world.
Morality and evil are the among the biggest concerns in religion for which there have been many
‘answers. Kant argues that God is the anchor for morality but that the problem of evil and the idea of justice will be
solved in eternity. Others have provided alternate answers. St. Augustine suggested that fee will is the cause of evil
in this world. Original sin has been a growth out from this for why each one of us suffers. Spinoza’s pantheism is an
explanation of this in that it doesn’t require a moral agent--God. Rousseau and Voltaire, 2 philosophers from the
French revolution, have suggested deism—the idea that God started everything but has otherwise stepped back
and let things run (created the machine). Hinduism and Buddhism have also had their own respective ways of
attempting to answer this. Hinduism says its karma which is the idea that what you do with your free will changes
you as a person and brings evil to your life. The Baghavadita, a Hindu text shows that killing those who are enemies
of good is the solution! Buddhism suggests the solution is in us- that we show compassion for others.
These questions are vitally important for any person. Your conception of God and understanding of what
is morally right and what evil is and what should be done about it will dramatically impact how you live your life.
The question of “is there a God?” is an enormously important one as well that lies in the realm of both philosophy
and religion. One must examine the science, the history and the logic to these positions and choose one before
one can properly understood one’s own place in the world. The wise man will listen and seek.

Response To Pp. 121-162 Intro To Philosophy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Response To Pp. 121-162 Intro To Philosophy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Response To Pp. 121-162 Intro To Philosophy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Payton Roth

You might also like