1 / 14

PAR 201: Medieval Philosophy

PAR 201: Medieval Philosophy. Medieval Philosophical Theology. Roman Era 0-500 Philo c. 0 Augustine c. 400 Islamic 800-1100 Al- Farabi , Averroes, Avicenna (Al- Gazzali ) Middle Ages 1000-1400 Anselm, Maimonides, Aquinas. Problem of relation of “reason” to “faith”

lchambers
Download Presentation

PAR 201: Medieval Philosophy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PAR 201: Medieval Philosophy

  2. Medieval Philosophical Theology • Roman Era 0-500 • Philo c. 0 • Augustine c. 400 • Islamic 800-1100 • Al-Farabi, Averroes, Avicenna (Al-Gazzali) • Middle Ages 1000-1400 • Anselm, Maimonides, Aquinas • Problem of relation of “reason” to “faith” • Natural vs. revealed theology • Concept of God & divine attributes • Proofs of existence or vs. non-existence of God Other topics, e.g. miracles, religious ethics

  3. Can we know that God exists – or that God does not exist? • Belief in “God” = Abrahamic religions • based on “faith” or “divine revelation” (e.g. scriptural) or “divine messengers” (e.g. Moses/Paul /Mohammed) • Philosophers of Religion: • Rational belief based on proof (“natural theology”) • Argument from experience or concept of God • vs. belief based on revelation (authority, faith) (“revealed theology”)

  4. Abrahamic concept of ‘God’ = • ONE • not many, nor one of a kind, nor composed of spirit and body • ALL-GOOD • not imperfectly good, but perfect and bountiful  creation, whose providence is both general and particular • ALL-POWERFUL • not lacking in any power or knowledge, omnipotent* and omniscient • CREATOR AND RULER OF THE UNIVERSE • Different faiths: Judaism; Christianity; Islam

  5. Two Types of “Proofs” of God “A priori” argument = based on the idea “A posteriori” proof = based on the world Cosmological Design Moral Arguments • Ontological Argument

  6. The Ontological Argument • God is “the greatest possible being.” • We conceive of God. • But then God mustexist, for if we were to conceive of him as not existing, he would not be “the greatest possible being.” • Therefore, God exists.

  7. A posteriori arguments • Cosmological Argument: cf. Thomas Aquinas: • First Mover argument • First Cause argument • Necessary Cause argument • Design Argument: cf. Thomas Aquinas, “5th Way” and “Intelligent Design” theorists today • Moral Argument: cf. Kant, C. S. Lewis • The moral laws are absolute, not contingent like natural laws. • There is no source of absolute laws, other than God. • Therefore the source of the moral laws is God.

  8. The Cosmological Arguments 1. The universe exists. 2. When anything exists, there must be a prior mover or cause of it. 3. But this cannot go backwards for infinity. 4. Therefore there must be a First Mover or First Cause.* 5. This = (part of) what we mean by ‘God’ *3rd Way argues to a “Necessary Cause”

  9. The Design Argument 1. “When there is ‘evidence of design’ and it is very unlikely it came about by chance, there is a Designer. 2. The universe shows a lot of evidence of design. – earth supporting life; living things themselves; human reason 3. Therefore there is a Designer of the universe, i.e. God.”

  10. The Argument from Evil 1. If God is all good and all powerful, there would be no evil*. 2. But evil exists Innocent suffering* caused by human agents Innocent suffering caused by non-human agents, e.g. disease 3. Therefore there is no all-good and all-powerful God.

  11. Theodicies Some things are beyond even God’s control “God has reasons we cannot fathom” (variation: “what seems evil to us may be good to God”) Satan is responsible for evil, not God Justified punishment (Adam & Eve) Free will Soul-making (aka virtue-building)

  12. The Argument from Omniscience 1. Omniscience implies e.g. knowledge at T0 Peter will sin at Tn. (Indeed, he must sin.) 2. Therefore Peter cannot choose not to sin at Tn-1. 3. Human freedom implies the ability to choose to S or ~S, e.g. Peter can choose at Tn-1 to sin or not sin at Tn. 4. Therefore if God exists, man cannot be free; and if man is free, God cannot exist. 5. Since man is obviously free, God cannot exist

  13. Replies to Omniscience Augustine: God’s knowing does not cause the choice. Problem of ‘open future.’ Boethius: God knows from eternity, and does not have ‘foreknowledge’—this dissolves the problem. A modern argument: God’s omniscience does not require he exercise it—he sees our futures as a branching set of possibilities, all of which are open to us.

  14. Beginnings of Modernity • Art: Giotto 1300 Donatello 1400 • Religion: Gutenberg Bible 1455 Martin Luther 1517 • Science & World-View: Columbus 1492 Copernicus 1543 Newton 1687 Watt 1769 Darwin 1858 • Politics: • Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke 16th-17th centuries • Revolutions: English 1688 American 1776 French 1789 Russian 1917 • Philosophy: Descartes 1641 Kant 1781

More Related