Taylor's Cosmological Argument For The Existence Of God
For this paper, choose your own topic. Choose among the papers we've discussed in class, and write about the main argument of that paper. Some possible paper topics include:
(a) Taylor's cosmological argument for the existence of God
(b) Taylor's design argument for the existence of God
(c) Williams's thought experiment motivating a bodily continuity theory of personal identity
(d) Searle's Chinese Room thought experiment against AI
(e) Petersen's argument in favor of robot servitude
(f) Clifford's argument that it's morally wrong to believe on insufficient evidence
(g) Walton's argument that we do not respond to fictional entities with genuine emotion
(h) Walton's argument that we cannot have emotions towards what we believe not to exist
(i) Suits's argument that death is “nothing to us”
If you wrote about one of these topics for your first paper, choose another topic.
Your paper must conform to the following format:
1. Present the main argument for the topic you've chosen. This involves identifying the conclusion offered by the author of the paper you've chosen, and then presenting his/her reasons for thinking the conclusion is true.
2. Provide an argument against the argument given in (1). The argument here must be your own, not someone else's. Here you are giving some reason for thinking that the conclusion presented in part one is false.
3. Present an argument against the argument given in (2) from the perspective of the position defended in (1). In this part of your paper, you will be writing from the perspective of the author who defended the argument you present in part one. Offer some reason, from this perspective, why the argument presented in part two is not successful.
Basically, the structure should look like this: A; B rebuts A; A rebuts B. Make sure that your paper includes both an introductory paragraph in which you state explicitly what you are going to argue in your paper, and a conclusion in which you sum up what you've claimed in your paper.
Philosophy:
Name:
Institutional Affiliation:
Philosophy
It is not correct to continuously, anywhere, and for anybody to trust something upon unsatisfactory reason. Affirming anything without evidence means one can ignore it without evidence. It is essential for claims to have proof. For example, in the bible, Paul provides evidence for the Jesus' bodily resurrection, which includes a list of people who witnessed and who readers could ask to approve that they saw the Messiah alive after His death. Jesus Himself made signs frequently so people would believe.
Main Argument (1)
According to Clifford, believing anything on weak evidence is not just lousy thinking but is also ethically wrong. Clifford's primary reason for thinking his argument is true is that a person's nervous or wishful thinking can offend not just that individual, but also others. For this conclusion, Clifford offers the illustration of a vessel-owner who thinks, because of evidence of unusual wear and tear, that it might be good to fix his ship before the next journey. But when a gainful voyage presents itself, he assures himself that the vessel has one more assignment left before stopping for maintenance. Regrettably, it turns out that it was prudent to repair the ship before setting sail, and it sinks during the trip, and all on-board drowns.
One is required to exercise "tolerant questioning" without "bias and passion" to attain a good decision. A person should ask the correct questions and try to solve them in the right way. Clifford argues that a question accurately asked is half-answered and the method used to look for a solution is the other half of the answer. According to him, it is immoral to assume one's doubts simply because it is more appropriate or less hurting to believe a particular way. It is factual that doubt is an unpleasant thing because it leaves people bare and helpless where they assumed that they were safe and resilient. Clifford has the lovely and unpleasant perception that "it is the sense of authority" that the sensation of awareness can bequeath to us that makes individuals eager to believe, hence, scared of doubting.
When it comes to a person's Christianity and spiritual beliefs, Clifford who is an atheist is inpatient with sacred die-hards and extremists who do not question. He asserts that an individual who starts by adoring Christianity better than Truth will continue to love his church better than Christianity, and conclude by enjoying himself/ herself better than all.
An argument against the Argument in (1) above
There is confusion in Clifford's case. There is no reason for the belief that all views require proof. In fact, Clifford's conviction that each trust needs evidence is itself not logical. It is not true that for instance if an individual cannot verify something scientifically, he/ she does not know it.
It does not mean that if a person does not have evidence for his/ her beliefs, then the opinions are illogical. Someone's memory belief that they had pork for lunch the previous day is quite clear. But it undoubtedly is not evident to the minds. It is not coherent that such a person requires evidence to distinguish what he/ she had for lunch the...