The concpet and nature of God (ICoG) Flashcards
What is meant by omniscient
God knows all true propositions ( God knows all truths and cannot possibly lack all this knowledge)
What is meant by God’s omnibelevolent
God is a supremely good being as God only does what is morally good and cannot do anything morally bad.
What is meant by God’s omnipotent
It is possible for God to bring about any state of affairs. In other words he is all powerful.
Explain the Paradox of the stone
The paradox of the stone is the argument which demonstrates the concept of God’s omnipotence being incoherent. A concept is an abstract idea in the mind typically of a thing with proporistes and does not have to be true or false.
P1- Either God cannot make a stone that God cannot move or God cannot do it.
P2- If God can make such a stone then there is a task that God cannot do
P3- If God cannot make the stone then there is a task that God cannot do
P4- Therefore either way there will always be a task that God cannot do
C- Therefore there cannot be a being that can perform all tasks in other words an omnipotent being is impossible.
It is a deductive sound argument because the truth of the premises can guarantee the truth of the conditions. It is also sound as it is both true and logical. As well as this it is ‘a priori’ justification as it is independent of experience.
Explain The incompatibility of the existence of an omniscient God and free human beings
The incompatibility of existence of an omniscient God and free human beings is an argument which aims to demonstrate God’s omniscience is incompatible with God’s omnibenevolence if we assume it is morally better for humans to have free will. In other words it is an incoherent concept for God to be both omniscient and omnibenevolent. Omniscient means that God knows all propositions and omnibenevolent means that God cannot do something morally wrong. A concept is an abstract idea in the mind typically of a thing with properties that cannot be true or false.
P1: If God is omniscient then God knows all true propositions ( past, present and future)
P2: If God knows all true propositions then God knows what I will do
P3: If God know what I will do then I am unable to do anything else
P4: I am unable to do anything else, then I am not free
P5: If I am not free then God is not omnibenevolent
C: Therefore God is omniscient then I am not free
C: : Therefore, if God is omniscient then God is not omnibenevolent and so the concept is incoherent
It is a deductive argument as the truth of the premises can guarantee the truth of the conclusions. It is also a valid argument as it is logical but it is not necessarily true that we as humans do not have freewill. As well as this, it is ‘a priori’ justification which means that it is independent upon experience.
Explain the Euthyphro dilemma
The Euthyphro dilemma (A dilemma is where you have two arguments that leave you with no obvious answer) is aiming to explain how there are only two ways of understanding God’s relationship to moral goodness, and both have unacceptable implications.
The first argument states that actions/events are morally right/good independently of God’s commands (and that is why God commands them). This is unacceptable because it means that God is not omnipotent as God did not create morality and cannot control/change it. This also has implications for the view, related to God’s omnipotence, of God as creator. God cannot have created everything if morality exists but was not created by God. Therefore God can notnot be the most supreme being if morality is above him.
On the other hand, actions/events are morally right/good only because God commands them (they wouldn’t be morally right/good otherwise). In other words Divine Command Theory. This argument is unacceptable because it means that God cannot give an objective justification for particular actions being morally right/wrong - morality is arbitrary. As well as the actions that we intuitively think of as obviously morally wrong could have been (and could yet be) morally right (and vice versa).
For example Imagine God were to say, “Torture is wrong because it causes pain.” This would not work, since we could then ask God, “why is pain morally bad rather than good?”. At some point, the reason will have to just be “because I said so” which is not an objective justification. The moment God gives a reason for an action being wrong, this reason exists independently of God, and we are left with option above and its problematic implications.
Therefore, there is no acceptable way to understand an omnibenevolent God’s relationship to moral goodness. Therefore, God cannot be supremely good.
This is two valid deductive arguments because the truth of the premises can guarantee the truth of the conclusions. It is valid because it is logical but not necessarily true on both accounts. It is also a dilemma as it is two arguments that leave you with no obvious answer.
What is an argument
An argument is when one or more propositions are used to justify another proposition.
It contains :
- one or more propositions which are used as part of an argument in order to justify a conclusion
- One or more propositions which are supported by the premises of an argument ( conclusions)
For example
P1- Socrates is a man
P2- All men are mortal
C- Therefore Socrates is a mortal man
What is a deductive argument
An argument were the truth of the premises can guarantee the truth of the conclusions. For a deductive argument to be good (sound) it must be true and logical If it is not then it is unsound. If it is not then it is unsound. It is is logical but not necessarily true then it is valid.
What is a non-deductive argument
A non-deductive argument is were the truth of the premises can suggest that the truth of the conclusions is probable. For it to be good argument ( cogent) it must be true and logical. If it not it is uncogent. If it is logical but not true it is strong and can be weak or strong depending on how probable it is.
What is a concept
A concept is an abstract idea in the mind typically of a thing with properties. It cannot be true or false like a propositions, but can be coherent or incoherent. Concepts are distinct from language, but can be expressed using it.
