A-Priori Vs A-Posteriori Flashcards
(12 cards)
A-Priori is better: Deceive us
Our experience can always deceive us (unwell or psychological factors)
A-Priori is better: Defined terms
A-Priori works within defined terms so logic is easier to follow - Ockham’s Razor
A-Priori is better: Modern OA is better
Descartes OA works better than Anselm’s
A-Priori is better: unreliable experience
Our experiences are unreliable and can be false - math is never wrong.
A-Posteriori is better: Unable to Know God
OA relies on us knowing Gods nature which is impossible because the epistemic distance is too great. Anslem’s argument cannot be followed.
A-Posteriori is better: Hume (cannot think of a being that cannot not exist)
It is impossible to think of a being who cannot not exist - you can always thing about not existing.
A-Posteriori is better: Experience is what we know
We like experience because it is what we know and most of the time we trust our sense (principle of Credulity)
A-Posteriori is better: See Gods work
It is likely we would be able to see Gods work if he existed.
alternative approach: different Jobs
The arguments join to create one argument for the existence of God to add to our understanding.
Counter to the alternative approach: Flew
“if one leaky bucket cannot hold water then there is no reason to suppose 10 can”
Alternative approach: reliance on revelation
Human logic cannot prove a being as great as God so we rely on God to reveal to us.
Alternative approach: only for believers
Similar to what Anselm believed, these arguments are merely meant to reaffirm faith rather than disprove atheists.
