Which follows from the Theory that Morality is a Matter of Social Conventions? Right and Wrong depend on what society approves of
Which follows from the Theory that Morality is a Matter of Social Conventions?
Right and Wrong depend on what society approves of
Which must be True if God commands Actions b/c they are Good?
Morality does not depend on what God says
Which is a Potential Problem 4 Atheism ?
– Without God, Morality would have no basis and life would have no meaning
Which of the following must be true if morality is a matter of social conventions?
-In a culture that disapproves of smiling, it is morally wrong to smile.
Which is a Premise of the Moral Argument for God’s Existence ?
Morality is Not Objective Unless God exists
Which is a Premise of the Moral Argument for God’s Existence? v2
Morality is objective and not just a matter of social convention.
Which is a Premise of the Moral Argument for God’s Existence? v3
Morality — right and wrong — is objective and not just a matter of social convention.
Which is Potential Problem 4 the view that Heaven & Hell are Necessary 4 Earthly Existence 2 be meaningful?
The view only Raises the Further Q of what makes Existence in Heaven Meaningful
Which is a Potential Problem 4 the view that what Makes Things Good is the Fact that God Commands Them?
If that view correct, then God has No basis 4 Deciding what to Command & what 2 Forbid,
Which of the following is Potential Problem 4 the view that Morality is a Matter of Social Conventions?
If that view correct, then if a Culture Decided that Murder was OK, it Would be OK
Which Must be True if Morality is Objective?
If murder is Morally WRONG, Society might or might not approve of it
Which is the Best Response an ATHEIST might make to claim that, UNLESS God Exists, we CAN’T know the difference between Good and Bad?
One can know that pain is bad and pleasure is good without having a divine revelation.
Which is Consistent w/ claim that we CAN”T be 100% Certain Whether God Exists
Atheism, Theism and Agnosticism
Which Best Describes someone who BELIEVES that God EXISTS, but is not 100% certain?
Which best describes someone who Believes that God DOES NOT EXISTS, but is not 100% certain?
Has No Opinion on Whether God Exists
Which of the following claims must theists and agnostics both deny?
We know that God does not exist
Believes that God DOESNT exist
Which is consistent with Atheism?
All of the other options
Which of the following Claims Must Atheists & Agnostics Both Deny?
We know that God exists
Which is the Best Response Atheists might make to the Moral Argument for God’s existence?
-Morality has an Objective Basis that is INDEP. of God’s existence, Since otherwise there would be NO point in calling God good.
Which , if True, would help an ATHEIST reply to the Objection that Atheists have no reason to be good people?
Morality (right & wrong) could have a NON-Religious basis — such as Social Conventions or the badness of suffering.
Which of the following views concerns our knowledge of God’s existence rather than God’s existence itself?
Agnosticism but not theism or atheism.
If God is Omnipotent in the NONPARADOXICAL Sense & if Morality is Objective and INDEP. of God, then must be true?
God’s commands could not make what is good evil or what is evil good.
Which of the following expresses, non-paradoxically, the idea that God is omnipotent ?
He can do anything that is possible, but not what is impossible.
Which is Consistent with the claim that Morality is Objective and INDEPENDENT of God?
God is Omnipotent in the Non-Paradoxical sense
Which Expresses Non-Paradoxically, the IDEA that god is OMNIPOTENT ?
God is all powerful, but he couldn’t still make a 4 sided triangle
What Q does Socrates raise in response to Euthyphro’s claim that what is good is what God commands?
-Are good actions good b/c God commands them, or does God command them b/c they are good?
Which Best captures the Principle known as “OCCAMS RAZOR”?
If you don’t need to assume something exists in order to explain what you are trying to explain, then don’t
Which is a premise of Paley’s version of the design argument for God’s existence? v1
There are wonders of nature: natural things such as the eye, with parts that function well together for a clear purpose.
Which is a premise of Paley’s version of the design argument for God’s existence? v2
The best explanation of the wonders of nature is that God designed them.
Which Best captures the point of Paley’s example about the watch?
If something Consists of Complex Set of Parts that Work Together for Common Purpose,
In the sense of Paley’s design argument for God’s existence, which of the following is an example of a wonder of nature?
A Complex Organ, Such as an Eye or Heart.
In the Sense of Paley’s design argument for God’s existence, a wonder of nature is …
Natural thing with parts that work together for a clear purpose.
Which is a Testable Prediction of the theory of Evolution but Not of the Theory that the wonders of Nature were Products of Design, in Paley’s sense?
All of the other options
Which is a likely OBJECTION to the claim that, even given Evolution by Natural Selection, it would be Highly IMPROBABLE that complex life would develop?
If we knew enough about the Initial Conditions & the Processes Involved
Which of the following best explains the role of chance in evolution by natural selection?
There is an element of chance to what genetic mutations occur, but it is not a matter of chance which mutations become predominant in a population.
Suppose the only 2 possibilities are that
B/C we have NO WAY of Understanding how the Wonders of nature were Designed,
Relevance of the Panda’s THUMB example 2 Debates about whether the Wonders of nature are Products of Intentional Design?
It is an example of a Feature Jury Rigged in a way we might EXPECT from Evolution but NOT from Design by a Perfect Deity.
Which is a Problem 4 Paley’s version of the Design Argument.
Even if the Best Explanation of the wonders of nature is that they were designed by someone,
Suppose Theo says that the wonders of nature are best explained by supposing God designed them, &
2 theories why Jack has trouble finding his keys.
Common Error Involved in arguments that a complex trait COULDN’T have arisen through processes of natural selection?
Presupposing that the Predecessors of the trait must have served the Same Function in the Same way as the Trait now does
Which Best characterizes the Prediction that the FOSSIL RECORD will show a General PROGRESSION of species that includes some that no longer exist?
Although Consistent with both the Theory of Evolution & Theory that the wonders of nature are Products of Design,
Which, if True, might favor an Explanation of conscious life that involves a HIGHER BEING, even if life could in principle have emerged Naturally from Physical Components?
It is extremely IMPROBABLE that Conscious life Did emerge that way.
Which of the following is a premise in the “existence of life” version of the design argument for God’s existence? (2)
– If the best explanation of the existence of life is that God designed it, then God exists.
Suppose it is Improbable that the universe’s “initial settings” just happened to be exactly right for life to emerge, given all the Alternative Possible “initial settings”.
Because it is also improbable that the Deity that happens to exist has desires that are exactly right for life to emerge, given all the alternative possible desires He might have had.
MAIN IDEA of the FINE-TUNING argument 4 the Existence of God?
W/o God, Extremely IMPROBABLE that the laws of nature (& other fundament. features of the universe) would have been just Right 4 life to have emerged.
Explanation of the FINE-TUNING of the universe does JOHN LESLIE propose?
There are multiple universes, with different initial settings & BASIC LAWS laws,
According to the Reasoning of the FINE-TUNING argument, which would be HIGHLY IMPROBABLE unless God existed?
The “initial settings” of the universe are compatible with the emergence of life.
Which of these is a Plausible response 2 CRITICISM that Evolutionary Biology FAILS 2 Explain the Existence of life?
Evolutionary Biology DOESN’T try to explain the Existence of the Building Blocks of Life.
Suppose Scientists have discovered that the Building Blocks of life on earth arrived from OUTER SPACE, on meteors.
NEITHER Strengthens nor Weakens the argument.
Potential Problem 4 the view that Evolutionary Biology provides an Adequate Explanation for the wonders of nature?
Although it explains how living things REPLICATE & EVOLVE, DOESN’T explain why there is Life in the 1st place.
Suppose Scientists have NOT yet explained the origins of the Building Blocks of Life.
It Neither Strengthens nor Weakens the argument.
Suppose U using a net to fish in a lake and you pull out lots of fish,
NONE of the other options.
Which Aspect of Life might raise a SPECIAL Problem for explaining life in Purely Physical terms?
Which is a Problem 4 the Argument from life for God’s Existence?
Even life was designed, it doesn’t follow that the designer still exists or that there was only one designer rather than a committee of designers.