Philosophy Midterm

Front 1

Valid Argument

Back 1

Proper logical form providing conclusive support for the conclusion.

Front 2

Sound Argument

Back 2

is valid AND has all true premises.

Front 3

Deductive Argument

Back 3

provides logically conclusive support for the conclusion, if the premises are all true.

Front 4

Inductive Argument

Back 4

provides probable support for the conclusion.

Front 5

What type of evil is Rowe’s argument is based on?

Back 5

Intellectual: How is it logical for God to allow suffering/evil?

Front 6

What story does Rowe uses to show premise 1 of his argument is true?

Back 6

A fawn dying a painful and pointless death in the woods.

Front 7

What makes Rowe's argument strong?

Back 7

There does not appear to be any greater good that came about from the fawn’s death nor any equal or greater evil that would have resulted had God saved the fawn

Front 8

Moral Evil

Back 8

suffering that directly result from the actions of
moral agents (persons-angels, demons, humans).

Front 9

Natural Evil

Back 9

suffering that does not result from moral
agents, but natural processes (natural disasters-earthquakes,disease, famine, wildfires).

Front 10

What kind of knowledge does Moser think God wants us to have of him?

Back 10

God hides himself so that we may come to know Him in a way that transforms us. (Knowledge of acquaintance).

Front 11

How is this different from what the atheistic argument from divine hiddenness looks for?

Back 11

The atheistic problem is that the lack of evidence is itself evidence against God's existence.

Front 12

Local Skepticism

Back 12

Some areas of inquiry don’t allow for knowledge.

Front 13

Global Skepticism

Back 13

We can’t know anything at all about the world.

Front 14

What are Willard's Worldview Questions?

Back 14

1. What is reality?

2. Who is well off, blessed?

3. Who is a genuinely good person?

4. How do you become a genuinely good person?

5. How do we know which answers to the four worldview questions are true?

Front 15

What is a priori knowledge?

Back 15

Knowledge apart from the senses. Knowledge you have before you do something.

Front 16

What is a posteriori knowledge?

Back 16

Knowledge from the senses. Knowledge you obtain after you do something.

Front 17

Rationalism

Back 17

All truth can be known by the mind itself by

inquiring within (Descartes). Based off of observation.

Front 18

Empiricism

Back 18

Sense perception is the only way to

knowledge (Locke, Hume).

Front 19

What is the Correspondence Theory of Truth?

Back 19

A proposition is true if and only if it corresponds to reality; what it asserts to be the case is the case.

Front 20

According to the CToT, is there such a thing as "your truth" or "my truth?" Why or why not?

Back 20

No, something has to relate to reality in order to be true.

Front 21

What is the Reverse Moral Argument?

Back 21

Evil is the privation of goodness; the departure from the way things ought to be.

• However, if atheism is true, it is difficult to understand how there is any way for anything to be.

• The very notion of evil is design laden and morally prescriptive.

If God does not exist, objective values do not exist.

Evil exists.

Therefor, values exists.

Therefor God exists.

Front 22

What is the CORNEA response to the problem of evil?

Back 22

You are entitled to infer that “There is no x”

from the fact that “So far as I can tell, there is no x” only if it is reasonable for you to believe that if there were an x,it is likely that you would perceive (or find, grasp,comprehend, conceive) it.

Front 23

What is the classical definition of knowledge?

Back 23

Justified, true belief.

Front 24

What is Clifford’s ship-owner case supposed to show about how we ought to form beliefs?

Back 24

-Despite the sincerity of his belief his belief was not a product of earnest investigation

(how might it have been?)

-He had no right to believe on the evidence before him

It is always wrong for anyone to believe anything on insufficient evidence.

Front 25

Why would Clifford find Pascal’s Wager an irresponsible way to believe in God?

Back 25

Pascal's Wager is all about believing in God because there is no good evidence against it, which is the opposite of what Clifford says.

Front 26

What is Paul Moser’s understanding of the filial knowledge of God?

Back 26

Filial: Father/Son

Knowledge of God from Jesus

Requires that you know Jesus to know God

Front 27

What is the evidential response to the problem of evil as discussed in class?

Back 27

Rowe's Evidential Argument

1. There exists instances of intense suffering which anomnipotent, omniscient being could have prevented withoutthereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil

equally bad or worse. (Factual Premise)

2. An omniscient, wholly good being would prevent the occurrence of any intense suffering it could, unless it could not do so without thereby losing some greater good or permitting

some evil equally bad or worse. (Theological Premise)

3. There does not exist an omnipotent, omniscient, wholly good

being

Front 28

According to St. John of the Cross, why does God removes his felt presence from us?

Back 28

So that we would come to know in a deeper sense,that apart from God, we can do nothing (Jn. 15:5).

God uses dark night of the soul to kill our idols.

Front 29

Strong Rationalism:

Back 29

1. Religious belief-systems can and must be rationally criticized and

evaluated.
2. In order for a religious belief-

system to be properly and rationally accepted, it must be possible to prove that the belief-system is true.

Front 30

Fideism:

Back 30

1. Religious belief-systems are not subject to rational criticism and evaluation.

2. Conclusive proof of religious belief is impossible, and it is impossible to rationally know what religious belief-system is

true.

Front 31

Critical Rationalism:

Back 31

1. Religious belief-systems can and must be rationally criticized and

evaluated.

2. Conclusive proof of religious belief is impossible, although it is possible to know what religious belief-system is true.

Front 32

What does Moore claim is the best phrase to describe “external things”?

Back 32

Indirect Realism: You do not perceive external objects directly, what you perceive directly is a mental image of those external world objects.

Front 33

Moore's Conditions for Proof

Back 33

1. Not circular; can’t have the conclusion as a premise.

2. We must know the premises, not merely believe them.

3. The conclusion really follows from the premises (must be a valid argument).

Front 34

What is the natural consequences theodicy?

Back 34

Natural evil exists as a result of the natural consequences in creation, which God allows in order for us to know how ruined we are and how desperately we need him.

Front 35

Propositional Knowledge

Back 35

Knowledge of proposition (know about something)

Front 36

Knowledge via acquaintance

Back 36

Knowledge of things (Know because of something)

Front 37

Does knowledge by acquaintance require propositional knowledge or concepts?

Back 37

You don't need it

Front 38

Willard's view on Knowledge

Back 38

We have knowledge of something when
we are representing it (thinking about is, speaking of it,treating it) as it actually is, on an appropriate basis of thought and experience.

Front 39

What does Knowledge require, according to Willard?

Back 39

Knowledge requires truth.

Knowledge requires justification/reasons/evidence/experience.

Front 40

Willard's view on Belief

Back 40

Belief is not necessarily tied to truth.
Belief involves the will in a way that knowledge doesnot.
Our beliefs ought to be based on knowledge.

Front 41

What does belief involve according to Willard?

Back 41

involves a readiness to act, in appropriate
circumstances, as if what is believed where true.

Front 42

Willard's definition of commitment

Back 42

a matter of choosing and implementing

a course of action.

Front 43

Commitment does _________ require truth, belief or knowledge.

Back 43

not

Front 44

Willard's definition of Posession

Back 44

Profession is an expression that one

believes something.

Front 45

Possession is not...

Back 45

necessarily linked to truth, knowledge or belief

Front 46

Knowledge has the power to....

Back 46

influence and change people

Front 47

Intellectual POE

Back 47

How it is logically impossible for both God and Evil to exist

Front 48

Emotional POE

Back 48

How can God allow evil to exist?

Front 49

What makes Rowe's fawn argument weak?

Back 49

..

Front 50

Freedom Response?

Proper Motivation Response?

Divine Hiding and Human Deficiency?

Back 50

..