Unit One THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION.pptx

This powerpoint presentation contains discussion on Philosophy of Religion. Different types of argument, realists and non realists, different types of principles, doctrine of simplicity and etc.

1. PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION WEEK 1

2. INTRODUCTION: Philosophy of Religion is a philosophical undertaking about the nature and meaning of religion. Its an analysis of religious beliefs, terms, arguments, and practices. Most approaches to the study are theistic, although non-theistic discussions are also included.

3. In this unit, a great deal of discussions is derived from relevant fields of study such as philosophy, sociology, psychology, and the natural sciences.

4. 1.1 Religious Belief and Language In every major religion is an inherent belief about a metaphysical, transcendent reality underlying the natural and physical world. In relation to this, the concept of the Ultimate Reality, as it is commonly addressed in philosophy of religion, engenders a diverse world view between the Eastern and Western religions.

5. The Western religion, particularly the three religions of Abrahamic descent (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), conceived the Ultimate Reality in terms of a personal God as a Creator and Provider of all that is absolutely perfect. There are many attributable properties or characteristics of God are ascribed in a positive sense such as: omniscience (all-knowing), omnipotence (all-powerful), and immutability (unchanging from beginning till the end).

6. The Easter Religions- particularly Buddhism, Taoism, and Hinduism; have conflicting views regarding the Ultimate Reality which they understood as not a personal creator God, but an absolute state of being or and undifferentiated Absolute Reality. Taoism refers to the Ultimate Reality as the Tao; Hinduism refers to it as Brahman; Buddhism calls it with different names which include Shunyata and Nirvana.

7. Aside from that, Eastern religions bring different significant issues from those of the such as salvation as equal to liberation, life after death, evil and suffering.

8. John Schellenberg called his recent view of Ultimate Reality as “ ultimism ” which is neither theistic ( a belief on the existence of God) nor pantheistic ( a belief that God is identified with the universe). This new idea holds that the best religious perspective is to have a faith on metaphysical (something that transcends the realm of the physical world) and axiological (something that relates to the essence of values) ultimate reality.

9. Religious language , however, has something to do with statements or claims made about God or gods. Some experts in the field in Philosophy of Religion. Some experts in the field in Philosophy of Religion consider that there is an obvious inadequacy of limited human description using the infinite attributes like the term “eternal”.

10. The human attribution, which is finite in character, in the use of the term “eternal” seems to be a mismatch with the essential meaning of such term which is infinite in character. As a result, there is an obvious ambiguity in the meaning of terms predicated of God by humans.

11. This ambiguity in the divine attribution by humans is what is known as “the problem of religious language” or “problem of naming God.” The problem of religious language rhas challenged the spiritual truths being proclaimed in the form of written texts, commentary traditions, and oral teachings by different world religions.

12. Without any plausible solution, the human speech about God can be put into question by some individuals (particularly the atheists). With appropriate human speech used about God being put to question, the different theistic world religions are vulnerable to criticisms and their teachings become unintelligible.

13. In philosophy, the problem of religious language can safely assume that if there is no adequate solution available to them, then the discussions in philosophy of religion regarding this matter will likewise be unintelligible . If both in religion and philosophy religious language is unintelligible , then faith in any religion would be doomed .

14. The Source of the Problem of Religious Language The root cause of the problem of religious language did not spring from the issue of God’s existence. Hence, we cannot blame the aetheists (those who do not believe that God exists).

15. Also, the doctrine of Simplicity can be pointed out as its source. Any human attribution through speech, can be contrary to this because Simplicity means that God contains everything in Him, undivided.

16. To sum up, the two sources of Religious Problem are: The traditional Abrahamic attributes like incorporeal, infinite and timeless which are based on human attributes like corporeal, infinite and temporal. The doctrine of Divine Simplicity which posits that no human speech can render the Divine Existence more perfect because God’s existence and essence are One

17. Several Solutions 1. Verificationism . Developed by logical empiricists of the Vienna Circle during the early 20 th century. Logical empiricists confine the test of truth-values on experience. Thus, what is true is verifiable through experience while that which is not verifiable is false.

18. If a statement is false, it is meaningless or unintelligible. One of its proponents is Rudolf Carnap. He argued that all metaphysical assertions are unverifiable. Hence, they are meaningless. A.J. Ayer agreed with carnap on this point.

19. Verificationism was greatly challenged by philosophers like Alonzo Church and Richard Swinburne causing such theory to be ultimately abandoned. Ayer defended the priniciple of Verificationism in his books entitled “the Principle of Verifiability” and “Language, Truth and Logic” which, however, failed to stop its collapse.

20. The principle of verification never succeeded in providing a solution to the problem of religious language through the use of experience alone

21. 2. Realism and Non-Realism . For Realists God’s existence is independent of human minds. Non-realists , religion is a human construct and religious language refers to human behavior and experience

22. One of the leading figures of Non-realists was Ludwig Wittgenstein. Wittgenstein argued that language has no fixed meaning but represents human activity which keeps on changing. Language does not provide a picture of reality but manifests a set of activities which he called “language games.”

23. For him, speech and action work together so that anyone who wants to learn a language must respond to the words being used according to different contexts. It seems like Wittgenstein was an early adherent to the belief that action speaks louder than words.

24. Some non-realists like Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) and Don Cupitt (1934-) have desired a transformation of religion. Cupitt rejects historic religious dogma for the reason that such would encompass an outdated realist metaphysics and cosmology.

25. He abandoned the idea of an objective and eternal truth and replaced it with truth as a human improvisation. Non-realists attack the realists by noting that there is a failure to provide evidences or justifications regarding God’s existence from evidence found in the natural world .

26. The realists responded. The first group of realists known as “fideists” argued that religion does not require evidence nor justification because it is about faith and trust. The second group of realists known as “evidentialists” asserted that there are good evidences and justifications of religious truths and claims.

27. The third group “reformed epistemologists (the term “reformed” is from the tradition of the Calvanist Reformation), a non-evidentialist group similar to the fideists ’ position, believed that evidence is not required for one’s faith to be justified.

28. 1.2 Religious Diversity After the previous discussions, we can already accept its reality as something inevitable. What can be our response to religious diversity?

29. Possible Responses to Religious Diversity 1.Religious pluralism. to avoid the doctrinal conflicts and to maintain that doctrine itself is not as important as religious experience and that the great religious traditions are equally authentic responses to Ultimate Reality.

30. John Hick was noted for this religious pluralism by applying the theory of Immanuel Kant (1724-18904) on the distinctions of the Noumena (things as they are in themselves) and Phenomena (things as they are experienced).

31. Hick also used the argument which he popularly called the “pluralistic hypothesis” which asserts that Ultimate Reality cannot be fathomed because it is beyond human understanding, yet its within the sphere of human experience through different spiritual practices and religious languages.

32. 2. Religious Relativism. Believers adhere to their religious claims as true vs. others.

33. This approach was advanced by Joseph Runzo who asserted that the correctness of a religion is relative to the worldview of its community of adherents. Even if Relativism might offered a more coherent account of religious conflict than pluralism, it can still be argued as a problematic response to religious diversity due to its lack of objectivity.

34. 3. Religious Exclusivism. The term is used in different ways in religious discourse, but a common element is that the central tenets of one religion are true, and claims which are incompatible with those tenets are false. Another common and related element is that salvation is found exclusively in one religion.

35. One of the prominent proponents of religious exclusivism was Alvin Plantinga.

36. 1.3. Arguments Regarding God’s Existence 1. Ontological Argument. An ontological argument is originally one which is inherently “a priori” in nature. If one is to reason using a priori approach, it practically originates from the mind without the aid of experience from the outside world.

37. St. Anselm argues that God is a being through which nothing greater can be conceived about. In other words, the idea of God alone is already beyond any measure. With this Anselm concluded that God must necessarily exist.

38. 2. The Five Ways This is the work of the greatest philosopher of all times, St. Thomas Aquinas. This is a Christian adaptation of the Greek work of the greatest Greek philosopher, Aristotle. Thus, this is of Aristotelian origin.

39. 1. Argument from Motion. Aristotelian concept of motion which posits that anything that is moved is moved by an unmoved mover. T here must be something in the beginning which caused these things to move, yet remain unmoved.

40. This unmoved mover or prime mover is known to St. Thomas Aquinas as God.

41. 2. Argument from Causation. It is here that Aquinas used the Aristotelian notion of cause which asserts that anything that changes is caused by an efficient cause. In the case of the Divine Reality, as an Efficient Cause,God must never move nor change while causing other things to change. It is here where the Divine Attribute of Immutability is ascribed.

42. 3. Argument from Contingency. Aristotle observed that ordinary creatures can just perish. He called them as “possible beings.” In contrast to them, Aquinas thought that possible beings can only come into existence if they are granted such perfection to exist. The Necessary Being must exist through whom possible beings depend on to exist.

43. 4. Argument from the Degree of Perfection. All things exhibit a degree of perfection. Some possess less perfection while others possess greater perfection. So, there must be a mode of greatest perfection of all, according to St. Thomas of Aquinas. Hence, God exists as the subject of the greatest degree of perfections there may be.

44. 5. Argument from Final Causes. A final cause is considered by Aristotle as the “end”, “intention” or “purpose” behind an action. In this part is about the teleology of things. Aquinas concluded that an Intelligent Being willed it that the world, for example, be controlled in an orderly fashion, something beyond man’s power to do.

45. Just take note, from what is presented above, only the first three of the “five ways” are considered cosmological proofs of God’s existence. Also remember that the five ways are considered the widely accepted proofs of God’s existence.

46. The great German thinker named Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716). His starting point is the simple question “why is there something rather than nothing?

47. Leibniz affirms that there must be an explanation or a sufficient reason for anything that exists wherein the explanation for such existence is only either in its own nature (God) or in a cause external to itself (creatures).

48. The Problem of Evil and Suffering The problem of evil is a contradiction to theism . Philosophy considers it as evil when a certain perfection is deprived of a certain thing . E.g. Vision is a perfection. Hence, vision is a good. Thus, its deprivation is not a good but evil.

49. In other words, evil exists when a certain perfection which is expected to be present is absent in a certain being. David Hume is one of the strongest proponents against theism on the basis of existence of evils in the world.

50. A logical problem of evil has been formulated in a plausible manner. This logical problem of evil asserted the two claims, (1) an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God exists, and (2) evil exists, are logically incompatible. Since evil ostensibly exists, the argument goes, God (understood traditionally as being omnipotent and omnibenevolent) must not exist.

51. For Hume, based on the above argument that its either God will exist or evil will exist, but not both. The above claims might appear to be mutually exclusive, but, they are not, strictly speaking, really contradictory to each other.

52. Hence, even if evils exist, such condition cannot discredit the existence of a Divine Reality. Thus, the argument against theism by Hume is untenable.

53. Evidential Problems This exposes any theistic philosopher on the bad side. This evidential argument from evil is based on the assumption that God is an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent Being who can and should prevent the existence of significant amounts of evil in the world. Since significant amounts of evil seem to exist, then God probably does not exist. One influential figure of Evidential Problems was William Rowe

54. A theistic philosopher named Stephen Wykstra used “skeptical theism” to counter the so-called the evidential argument. Skeptical theism is the expression that God’s ways are not man’s ways. Hence, no human can fathom the plans of the Divine Reality for the world we live in.

55. On the other hand, an argument for (not against) evidential problems was raised by Paul Drapper which is known as “hypothesis of indifference.” He argues that the world as it is, with its distribution of pains and pleasures, is more likely given what he calls “hypothesis of indifference” than given theism.

56. Theodicy This is the philosophical study of Divine Reality. Through this study, all critical attacks against theism are herein studied and countered in a rational manner.

57. There is a classical argument formulated for the purpose of answering the critics of theism. Here is that argumentation taking the general form: “God, an omnipotent and omnibenevolent being, will prevent/eliminate evil unless there is a good reason or set of reasons for not doing so. But, there is evil in the world. Therefor, God must have a good reason or set of reasons for not doing so.

58. Likewise, the said classical argument values so much the importance of man’s freewill which is another reason why evil abounds all the more with the end view of making him understand or learn from his mistakes.

59. St. Augustine of Hippo during the fifth century developed the first complete system of theodicy. For St. Augustine, God is perfect in goodness, and the universe, His creation, is also good and exists for a good purpose

60. Thus, all creation must be intrinsically good, while evil must only exist as a metaphysical privation, or a privation boni (privation of goodness), or the going wrong of something inherently good. This form of argumentation has been seen in several contexts, including those in the Eastern philosophy, like the great adage “man is inherently good.”

61. St. Augustine believes that both moral and natural evils occurred in the world as a result of the wrong use of freewill. Among all creatures, humans and angels are the only ones capable of such freewill.