Apologetics: Test 3

Front 1

Monism

Back 1

The belief that there is only one fundamental reality.

Front 2

Dualism

Back 2

The theory that reality is composed of two basic and distinct elements: mind and matter.

Front 3

Psychological Dualism

Back 3

affirms that human beings exist beyond the death of the body.

Front 4

Psychological Monism

Back 4

The belief that the mind and the body exist as part of the same entity; the world is physical.

Front 5

Behaviorism

Back 5

the theory that human and animal behavior can be explained in terms of conditioning, without appeal to thoughts or feelings, and that psychological disorders are best treated by altering behavior patterns.

Front 6

Functionalism

Back 6

belief in or stress on the practical application of a thing, in particular

Front 7

Indiscernibility of Identicals

Back 7

x is identical with y if, and only if x has a, y has a.

Front 8

Naturalism

Back 8

The belief that all reality is fundamentally material and all phenomena can be explained in terms of natural causes.

Front 9

Supernaturalism

Back 9

The belief that reality is more than nature; that a transcendent agent intervenes in the course of natural law.

Front 10

Metanarrative

Back 10

Any overarching, all-encompassing story that seeks to define the whole of reality.

Front 11

Contradiction

Back 11

something that both affirms and denies at the same time.

Front 12

Deconstruction

Back 12

A means of textual criticism that considers a text open to the reader's interpretation and laden with hidden bias, assumptions, and prejudices.

Front 13

Gratuitous Evil

Back 13

(maximum evil) Innocent suffering.

Front 14

Natural Evil

Back 14

Evil where there is not human will involved (natural disasters)

Front 15

Moral Evil

Back 15

Evil that is the result od human choices (Sept 11, murder)

Front 16

Describe Thomas Nagel's analogy and argument in "What it is like to be a bat?" What is his point? How does this relate to a physicalistic description of the mind?

Back 16

A

Front 17

Describe and Discuss a dualist perspective on human nature. Relate this to a Christian perspective and describe some of the major arguments for and against this perspective.

Back 17

a

Front 18

Describe and discuss a functionalist perspective on human nature. Relate this to a Christian perspective and describe some of the major arguments for and against this perspective.

Back 18

a

Front 19

What is the Marxist dialectic and how does it work?

Back 19

Dialectic materialism which says that in everything there is a thesis and an antithesis, which must inevitably clash. The result of the struggle and merging that comes from the clash is synthesis, which becomes the new thesis and that attracts another antithesis and produces a new synthesis

Front 20

Discuss in detail how a secular humanist would address the mind-body problem?

Back 20

They believe it is simply a manifestation of the brain. The mind is an extension of the natural world, explainable in purely physical terms. They believe that since matter is all that exists, the mind is a strictly physical phenomenon.

Front 21

How would each of the worldviews in your text understand truth?

Back 21

Christianity: The Bible; faith and reason

Islam: faith and reason

Secular-Humanist: based upon science

Marxist-Leninism: dialectical matter

Cosmic Humanism: everything is supernatural

Postmodernism: subjective truth

Front 22

Describe the historical progression from pre-modern to modern to post modern.

Back 22

Pre-Modern (<-1600): Strong belief in the supernatural.

Modern (1600-1960): Skepticism of the supernatural .

Postmodern (1960- ?): Skeptical of all claims to knowledge. (SM 63)

Front 23

Give examples of where and how postmodernism shows itself.

Back 23

Literature: Deconstruction

Philosophy: Relativism, pragmatism

Art: Dada, surrealism, pop-nihilism

History: Revisionist (anti-metanarrative)

Sociology: Multiculturalism

Front 24

Where do postmodernism and Christianity disagree? Discuss in detail.

Back 24

Christianity is a metanarrative, Christianity is historical, Christianity does propose moral norms, authority, and objective truth, what becomes of Scripture and interpretation of Scripture?

Front 25

What are the three types of evil?

Back 25

Moral, Natural, and Maximum

Front 26

Present in detail the argument from evil against the existence of God. What are possible solutions? Evaluate each solution.

Back 26

How could an omniscient, Omni-benevolent, Omnipotent God allow evil

Front 27

How can Christians answer the argument against the existence of God based upon the problem of evil?

Back 27

God's creation was very good, free will is an essential component of true humanity, we are not good, all evil will be destroyed one day, the end will be better than the beginning, God redeems, our God suffers with us.

Front 28

Discuss in detail the four philosophic elements of postmodernism.

Back 28

1. Rejection of Essentialism

-Things don't have real qualities independent of our knowing them

-there are only interpretations in different ways by different people

-What is normal is really determined by power

-What one believes to be true is only the product of their cultural situation

-Truth is nothing more than interpretation.

Front 29

2. Rejection of Universal Explanations

Back 29

-There are no legitimate metanarratives.

-Any universal theory rejects and suppresses something or someone.

-All metanarratives are tools of oppression.

Front 30

3. Role of the interpretive community.

Back 30

-Meaning can only be derived from one's cultural context

-Words create reality and have no normative meanings.

-Meaning is created by one's interpretive community.

Front 31

4. Rejection of Tradition

Back 31

-Everything is interpretation

-All interpretations are valid.

-Coherence and consistency are illusions.

Front 32

Equivocation

Back 32

occurs when we use different definitions for the same word, or when a word is taken in a different way than intended.

Front 33

Appeal to Pity

Back 33

occurs when one tries to persuade by invoking the listener to feel sorry for the individual or group for whom one is arguing.

Front 34

Ad Hominem

Back 34

argument to the person; when someone attacks his or her character.

Front 35

Appeal to Ignorance

Back 35

occurs to argue what something is true because it hasn't been proven to be false or to argue that something is false because it hasn't been proven true.

Front 36

Red Herring

Back 36

the introduction of an irrelevant side issue into an argument which ultimately distracts and confuses the case being presented.

Front 37

Hasty Generliation

Back 37

when you wish to make an argument for a certain position, you need to gather information for support

Front 38

Sweeping Generalization

Back 38

one takes a general rule and applies it absolutely to all instances, not recognizing that there are expectations.

Front 39

Begging the Question

Back 39

occurs when one simply assumes what he or she is trying to prove.

Front 40

Faulty Dilemma

Back 40

occurs when a person states that there are only a certain number of options, and you must choose between them, when in fact there are more options available.

Front 41

Complex Questions

Back 41

loaded question

Front 42

False Analogy

Back 42

an analogy is said to be false if it compared two objects that are actually relevant dissimilar or if the points of comparison are used to draw a conclusion that simply does not follow

Front 43

False Cause

Back 43

committed when a person believes that just one thing followed another there must be a causal connection

Front 44

Straw man

Back 44

occurs when a person misrepresent another's view so as to easily discredit it.

Front 45

Appeal to Majority

Back 45

appeal to a group of people to prove that something is true or false, right or wrong.

Front 46

appeal to tradition

Back 46

occurs when we appeal to a group of people to prove that something is true of false, right or wrong.