Logic And Nature Final

Front 1

Pascal

Back 1

-great evil to remain ignorant and to not consider the immortality of the soul

Front 2

"Doubters" argument

Back 2

-"all I have are unanswered questions about myself: I conclude that I ought not to look into anwering these question!" (absurd not to ask/answer question of immortality)

Front 3

What sort of person is the doubter?

Back 3

-not a good friend
-inconsistent (the fear challenges)
-short-sighted (even by worldly standards)
-dishonest- two kinds of "reasonable" people

Front 4

Lucretius

Back 4

-the mind (or soul=principle of life) is just another part of the body (materialism)

Front 5

Arguments against the immortality of the soul

Back 5

-the lightest bodies (like the soul) are easily dispersed
-the soul is born with, matures with, and grows old with, the body in life: so too in death
-lethal pain kills the body, so too grief the soul
-strong drink affects both (and can kill the body

Front 6

Bertrand Russel

Back 6

-life after death is "on a different footing" from the existence of God (there is relevant evidence) but no evidence for God
-religious belief in personal immortality assuages fear

Front 7

"personal immortality" is different from "life after death"

Back 7

believes that the soul can survive after death but just not forever

Front 8

Rene Descartes

Back 8

-I think therefore I am (cogito)
-immortality follows quite easily, once we realize that the soul is a simple thing

Front 9

Plato

Back 9

-like Lucretuis the soul is the principle of life

Front 10

philosophers

Back 10

-lovers of widom
-are not concerned with the body

Front 11

are not concerned with the body because

Back 11

the body hinders us from acquiring that which we love (wisdom)
-truth is not accessible to the sense (cave, no natural philosophy)
-the body brings positive evils in its wake (war, and so on)

Front 12

Socrates dilemma

Back 12

either knowledge is not to be attained at all or if at all only after death

Front 13

Socrates argument for the immortality of the soul

Back 13

-not only can opposites not become one another in the abstract but also in the concrete (snow cannot become fire, but it also cannot become hot: the number 3 cannot become an even number)

Front 14

the soul is

Back 14

the principle of life
-therefore it cannot die

Front 15

ethical implications

Back 15

don't fear death, because it will be better without the body

Front 16

"how shall we bury you?"

Back 16

"I owe a cock to Asclepius."
-he is saying he owes the God's because the cure him from his illness of not being able to attain wisdom (which is the body)

Front 17

Thomas Aquinas

Back 17

summa theologia

Front 18

argument that the soul is not a body (but the form of a body)

Back 18

-the soul cannot be a principle of life insofar as it is matter, otherwise all matter would be alive

Front 19

the soul cannot be a principle of life

Back 19

insofar as it is matter, otherwise all matter would be alive

Front 20

the soul is the principle of life

Back 20

insofar as some bodies differ from others (which is a difference in form)

Front 21

what makes some bodies alive?

Back 21

the form the bodies have, not the matter: the soul, then is a form

Front 22

argument that the human soul subsists

Back 22

-whatever knows and distinguishes things can have nothing of them in itself
-but human intellect knows and distinguishes all physical things
-so, its own existence must be independent of any body (it is subsistent)
-(there is also the fact that understanding is not limited to place and time as is sensation)

Front 23

argument that the soul of brutes don't subsist

Back 23

in short they don't have the capacity to understand

Front 24

argument that the human soul cannot be destroyed

Back 24

-something can be destroyed either accidentally (per accidents) or essentially

Front 25

something is destroyed accidentally

Back 25

when it is due to another thing that it is itself destroyed
-the soul is not destroyed just b/c the body is

Front 26

something is destroyed essentially

Back 26

when it undergoes a substantial chance (prime matter recieves a new form)
-this cannot apply to the human soul, since it is just a form (not matter), its not a composite thing to begin with, so its matter cannot receive a new form

Front 27

Lucretius

Back 27

-the God's exist (they have bodies)
-they did not bring about the order of things (like ghosts)
-probably atheist

Front 28

Gods
what would be their advantage? why change now, rather than later? where did they get the patterns?

Back 28

why they didn't create the world

Front 29

there is too much evil in the world

Back 29

?

Front 30

Epicurus' argument

Back 30

omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence (god is all powerful, all knowing, all good)

Front 31

so nothing happens by design

Back 31

it all happens by chance (the swerve)

Front 32

Bertrand Russel

Back 32

Russell's agnosticism: fear is the basis of belief in God (like Lucretius)

Front 33

Thomas Aquinas

Back 33

-beyond matter and form, agent and final causes are necessary (argument)
-although every agent intends an end, it does not follow that it knows it (flute-player)

Front 34

Aristotle

Back 34

physics

Front 35

The question

Back 35

does nature act for the sake of an end (for what is best)?

Front 36

hypothesis

Back 36

-rain does not fall in order that corn may grow: since what evaporates is cooled and falls, it just happens that corn grows, just as it just happens that rain spoils the corn on the ground: neither effect is intended
-Also our front teeth are sharp and easily tear food (it just happened so) while our back teeth are broad and grind food well (it happened so): all parts come together by chance and those that happen to work will together survive, while those that don't, don't (natural selection) Aristotle gets this argument from Empedocles

Front 37

Aristotles counter-argument

Back 37

-we see that there is a certain order among the means, which is a rational order, for intermediate steps are what they are because the end is what it is (just as occurs in artificial things, which we order) ex. a house, a spiders web
-instinct in animals even seems to raise the question whether they are intelligent (that is, whether they know what they are aiming at or not) because they do things which would require much deliberation and could not occur by chance
-if it has purpose, then why does nature not always produce that it intends? there are mistakes in are, there are mistakes in nature also: and mistakes presuppose purpose

Front 38

Fabre

Back 38

the hunting wasp

Front 39

Plato

Back 39

Cleinias' argument
1. paganism-
2. common consent- everyone believes in them so they must exist

Front 40

the materialists have mixed up soul and matter

Back 40

they see matter as a principle of soul, not the principle of the soul as matter

Front 41

plato

Back 41

things that only move others (matter, inert) and things that move themselves and others (soul living)

Front 42

if "all things were at rest in one mass, which of these principles would first spring up among them"?

Back 42

God is the soul which first moved the universe

Front 43

Rene Descartes

Back 43

the ontological argument
-have idea of perfection
-so if God contains all perfections he must exist

Front 44

Thomas Aquinas

Back 44

arguments

Front 45

objection 1

Back 45

problem of evil

Front 46

objection 2

Back 46

principle of simplicity (naturalism)
-nature can explain everything

Front 47

First way:

Back 47

everything moved is moved by another (otherwise is would be actual and potential at the same time)
-but this cannot go on forever (otherwise there would be no movement, therefore there must be a first there must be a first unmoved mover (God)

Front 48

Second Way

Back 48

everything which is caused is caused by another...(otherwise, very like the first way), therefore there must be a first uncaused agent (God)

Front 49

Third Way

Back 49

there are contingent things in the world (they are able to be or not to be)
-but if everything were this way nothing would exist by now, so there must be at least one necessary thing
-but such causes cannot go on to infinity, therefore there must be a first necessary being (God)

Front 50

Fourth Way

Back 50

things are more or less good, true and noble, therefore there must be a highest good, truth and nobility, which is the cause of all the others (God)

Front 51

Fifth Way

Back 51

things without intelligence are often seen to act for an end, therefore they achieve their ends by design not by chance
-but the intelligence which moves them is not their own, therefore there is an intelligent being which moves all natural things to their ends (God)

Front 52

Answer to objection 1

Back 52

God's omnipotence is such that evils (which God does not cause) are allowed, and good is brought out of them

Front 53

Answer to objection 2

Back 53

nature does not explain itself, nor do human choices