...AS Philosophy & Ethics Course Handbook 2013 to 2014 [pic] OCR AS Level Religious Studies (H172) http://www.ocr.org.uk/qualifications/type/gce/hss/rs/index.aspx OCR AS Level Religious Studies (H172) You are studying Philosophy of Religion and Religious Ethics and will be awarded an OCR AS Level in Religious Studies. The modules and their weightings are: |AS: |Unit Code |Unit Title |% of AS |(% of A Level) | | |G571 |AS Philosophy of Religion |50% |(25%) | | |G572 |AS Religious Ethics |50% |(25%) | If you decide to study for the full A Level you will have to study the following modules at A2: |A2: |Unit Code |Unit Title |(% of A Level) | | |G581 |A2 Philosophy of Religion |(25%) | | |G582 |A2 Religious Ethics |(25%) | Grading | ...
Words: 13036 - Pages: 53
...this essay I will be presenting an argument against the existence of Christian God. I will show how the Problem of Evil is a big factor when concerning Gods existence. I will explore the ideas of how God’s benevolence is contradictory to how the world is. I will also be presenting arguments for the existence of a God but countering them with my points along with philosopher’s theories. J.L Mackie said “if a good and powerful God exists, he would not allow pointless evil, but because there is much unjustifiable, pointless evil in the world, the traditional and powerful God could not exist.”[1]. When we talk about a benevolent God the problem arises of Evil in the world. It’s a problem because God is attributed as being Omnipotent, Omniscient...
Words: 763 - Pages: 4
...What exactly is the “problem of evil”? What is the difference between so-called “moral evil” and so-called “natural evil”? How does John Hick, in his essay “Problem of Evil”, set about solving the problem of both “moral evil” and “natural evil”? Do you think that either, or perhaps both, of Hick’s solutions is really able to solve what appears to be an unique problem of evil which the astrophysicist priest has to deal with in Arthur C. Clarke’s story, “The Star”? Intro In John Hick’s essay, Problem of Evil, and Arthur Clark’s short story, The Star, the reader is lead to think about the evils that are prominent in this world, and the reality of God in association and contrast with that evil. The writings are deeply philosophical and require the reader to think beyond surface level thought. This paper will discuss the problem of evil and moral evil versus natural evil, as described in John Hick’s essay, and the solutions that he presents and their ability to solve the problem that Clarke outlines in The Star. Problem of Evil The “problem of evil” that will be discussed in this paper refers to a common debate in the philosophical world of thought. Hick presents the problem in very basic terms: The problem of Evil has traditionally been posed in the form of a dilemma: if God is perfectly loving, He must wish to abolish evil; and if He is all-powerful, He must be able to abolish evil. But evil exists; therefore God cannot be both omnipotent and perfectly loving. (Thought...
Words: 832 - Pages: 4
...but can’t explain economic inequality from birth. Someone born into a poor household does not “deserve” their misfortune just as a wealthy baby did not “earn” the benefits of wealth. The socialist’s weakest argument is that profit by increasing a product’s price is “dishonest”. Dishonesty requires one party’s failure to recognize that they are being lied to. In a capitalist society, a person purchases goods at higher prices knowing they are paying more, and agreeing to do so out of a fundamental understanding of how capitalism...
Words: 1696 - Pages: 7
...The argument which I am focusing on is titled “No One Knowingly Does Evil” and is written by Socrates. This argument concludes that those who do evil things do them involuntarily. According to Socrates it is not in human nature to choose to act in a way what one believes to be harmful, instead of a way that is good. He claimed that all wrong, or evil, is only done out of ignorance and not from the intention to do evil. This view appears controversial because people are known to occasionally commit deeds that are apparently evil either out of self-interest or acting on impulse, against their better judgment. It is at this point that we come to an important clarification. Socrates did not state that doing wrong to others is ever right, but that the motivation for such actions determines the character of the will involve. Socrates maintained that people are never motivated to bring harm to themselves. Since Socrates believed that wrongdoing always harmed the wrongdoer, he saw all wrongdoing as a mistake in judgment or an expression of ignorance. This is especially true in cases where a life full of wrongdoing never physically harms the wrongdoer. Socrates believed that the most pitiable of humans were those who lived under the delusion that their wrongdoing benefited them. Socrates saw no conflict between self-interest and morality. On the contrary, he saw virtue as the greatest benefit and maintained that immoral actions actually harmed the agent and could therefore only be committed...
Words: 1254 - Pages: 6
...Introduction to Philosophy: Problems Essay 2: Existentialism Evaluation: 20% of final grade Length: 1400-1500 words Due: After uploading to Assignment2 students are required to hand in a hard copy of their essays at the beginning of their seminars on March 10, 2015. Late papers will be penalized 3% per day. Students must write this essay in order to complete this course with a passing grade. Choose 1 essay topic from the following list of 16: Sartre Write an essay which explicates and evaluates some of the central claims in Sartre’s “Existentialism” (the first essay of Existentialism and Human Emotions.) You should frame your essay around a particular philosophical claim or theme which you would like to write about in Sartre’s essay. For example: 1. How does Sartre argue that “existentialism is a humanism” and is his argument a good one? 2. What is Sartre’s notion of freedom and how does it relate to ethics? Is this a viable ethics? 3. Explain and evaluate the claim that “existence precedes essence.” What are the implications for living if one accepts this claim? Defend or consider problems with this position. 4. What does Sartre mean when he says that “man is condemned to be free” but also that we are nonetheless responsible for who or what we become? In what way are we free, in which ways are we responsible, and to whom are we responsible? Is Sartre right? If so, why? If not, why not? 5. Drawing on the entirety of the essay, develop an account...
Words: 1163 - Pages: 5
...My essay will summarize the problem of evil and analytically assess how it is that evil weakens the traditional characteristics of God. I will attempt to explain how the existence of evil challenges the traditional characteristics of God such as omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence and Omni benevolence using Hume’s famous quote, “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then is he impotent. Is he able but not willing? Then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?” (Hume) The theological and metaphysical problem of evil was formulated in 1779 by David Hume in his work “Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion” where he asked the question, if God is omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent and omnibenevolent then why does evil exist (Sherry)? The problem of evil causes us to look at the traditional characteristics of God and to analytically assess our suppositions about evil itself. If our God is a good, all powerful and just God as many people believe, then why would such a God allow evil to exist? This problem also brings to light questions about what is considered to be evil, whether it is moral evil committed by man or natural evil such as earthquakes, hurricanes and famine (Sherry). There are several arguments that have developed in reaction to the problem of evil that was suggested by David Hume. One such argument which is known as the free will defense claims that evil is solely caused by human beings, who must have the opportunity...
Words: 2021 - Pages: 9
...Is God Evil? Alan Gleisinger Walden University Is God Evil? “God either cannot or will not prevent evil. If God cannot prevent evil, then God is limited in power. If God will not prevent evil, then God is limited in benevolence. But if God is not limited in power or benevolence, why is there evil in the world?” Epicurus (Chaffee, 2013) Have you ever heard someone say, “I don’t understand why people believe in God when there is so much pain and suffering in the world?” This question, and others similar in it’s message are becoming more and more reasonable things to be asked. If God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and if God is good as he is believed to be in the traditional Western conception of God, then why would he allow evil to be such a prominent force in the lives of all of mankind (Soloman & Higgins, 2014)? In this paper I will show how the various arguments regarding the existence of God relates to the problem of evil in our world today. I will also show how these arguments relate to the different theories that try to answer questions about the problem of evil. With any attempt to answer the question of how can God exist with so much evil in the world, one must first have a clear understanding of what the problem of evil is. Simply stated, the problem of evil is: God is omnipotent (all-poweful), God is good, and evil still exists. Evil has two general categories, natural evil and moral evil. (Chaffee, 2013). Natural evil consists human suffering...
Words: 856 - Pages: 4
...with the existence of evil? The existence of evil is a seemingly irrefutable fact of life, one which Davies considers to be “the most discussed topic in the philosophy of religion.”1 This presents the theist with a dilemma, forcing them to make attempts at reconciling the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent and wholly good God with that of evil. Kreefy stresses the extent that this ‘problem of evil’ challenges theism, going so far as to claim that “more people have abandoned their faith because of this problem than for any other reason.”2 In the course of this essay, I intend to show that the existence of evil gives one sufficient cause to doubt traditional theism; and that one is rationally justified in doing so. In order to achieve this end, I shall identify the problem of evil, evaluating some of the major defences and theodicies proposed by theists and ultimately demonstrating that such attempts at accounting for the existence of evil are neither adequate nor convincing. The problem of evil is presented in two distinct modes; these being the logical argument from evil and its evidential counterpart. The logical problem of evil stems from the “contradiction involved in the fact of evil, on the one hand, and the belief in the omnipotence and perfection of God on the other.”3 At first glance, this contradiction is merely implicit, being made explicit through the presupposition that if God were a wholly good being, then He would desire to destroy evil insofar that “a good...
Words: 2152 - Pages: 9
...empirical methods. The 20th century however, saw a huge of interest again in the natural law theory. American legal philosopher, Lon Fuller who was “an outsider within the intellectual climate of mid-twentieth century legal philosophy” today, stands as “the leading natural lawyer” at the forefront of it. However, despite seeming to conform to natural law thinkers, Nicholson claims that Fuller’s “natural law terminology should not be allowed to obscure his originality”. He eschews the Christian doctrines normally present in natural law, and instead presents a more procedural approach to marry the ideas of morality and law. This essay will explore his claims - namely the “internal morality of law”, its moral authority and also further the argument that posits the inherent intertwine of law and morality is correct and necessary as the first line of defence against evil regimes and as a check and balance to ensure government accountability. Fuller’s Internal Morality of Law For context, it’s worth noting what Fuller believes as the purpose of law - that it is a purposive “enterprise of subjecting human conduct to the governance of rules”. Fuller begins by introducing two types of moralities - the morality of duty and aspiration. He describes the two using “an imaginary scale” that “starts at the bottom with the most obvious and essential moral duties and ascends upward to the highest achievement open to man”. Simply put, the morality of duty requires fulfillment as the minimum whereas...
Words: 3199 - Pages: 13
...Reply Paper to H.J. McCloskey’s Essay: On Being An Atheist H.J McCloskey makes many bold statements in opposition to the most common arguments for theism. To say the least, his bias shows through, even to the point of not seeing the deeper picture. He makes claims against the cosmological and teleological arguments. He then makes a point on how evil speaks against the existence of God. He then concludes with a statement that may or may not be supported by these statements (McCloskey, 1968). The Cosmological Argument McCloskey makes some statements about the necessity of a being that created the universe. He also makes some points about how this being cannot be perfect The Necessarily Existent Being It is amazing how people will require one set of standards for themselves, yet another set of standards for others. This is exemplified in the paper that is presented by H.J McCloskey. He States that proof is required for belief in a god (McCloskey, 1968, p. 51). But he also wants to believe in an origin of the universe in which a bunch of something without origin explodes to create hundreds of thousands of galaxies. Mr. McCloskey wishes to say that one must have proof before they believe. What Mr. McCloskey is not saying is that it would take proof to convince him not to believe in the manner he does. Mr. McCloskey has a belief system which serves his purposes. He has chosen a system that does not have enough solid defeaters to pull it apart. This allows Mr. McCloskey to settle...
Words: 2451 - Pages: 10
...does exist why does he allow evil to occur, why doesn’t he protect the innocent”. In the dialogue between Athea, Bea and Agnos, Bruce Russell uses the characters to tackle that exact question by focusing on the argument of the problem of Evil. Athea in this dialogue is used as the protagonist in the attack of theism, he lays the foundation of the dialogue by providing the premises on which he believes that God must not exist due to the presence of evil. Bea in this dialogue is considered the protagonist in the defense of theism, he role is to highlight the weakness in the problem of evil argument and furthermore suggesting alternative reasons for the presence of evil despite God’s existence. In this essay I shall summarize the setting of the dialogue between the two main characters, then delve into the arguments that are presented. I shall first highlight Athea’s argument against the presence of God, explaining the structure and conclusion of the problem of evil argument, as this lays the foundation for the whole dialogue. I shall then focus on Bea’s reaction to Athea’s argument, clarifying her perceived weakness of the argument and furthermore pointing out her theories on why the presence of evil exists despite Gods existence. Finally I shall present my opinion on the Problem of evil, illustrating the weakness in the premises and its inadequate consideration of the ways in which God might prevent evil without our knowledge while letting certain evils to exist that lead to a greater...
Words: 2222 - Pages: 9
...The full title of the first edition of Malthus' essay was "An Essay on the Principle of Population, as it affects the Future Improvement of Society with remarks on the Speculations of Mr. Godwin, M. Condorcet, and Other Writers." The speculations and other writers are explained below. William Godwin had published his utopian work Enquiry concerning Political Justice in 1793, with later editions in 1796 and 1798. Also, Of Avarice and Profusion (1797). Malthus' remarks on Godwin's work spans chapters 10 through 15 (inclusive) out of nineteen. Godwin responded with Of Population (1820). The Marquis de Condorcet had published his utopian vision of social progress and the perfectibility of man Esquisse d'un Tableau Historique des Progres de l'Espirit Humain (The Future Progress of the Human Mind) in 1794. Malthus' remarks on Condorcet's work spans chapters 8 and 9. Malthus' essay was in response to these utopian visions, as he argued: "This natural inequality of the two powers, of population, and of production of the earth, and that great law of our nature which must constantly keep their effects equal, form the great difficulty that appears to me insurmountable in the way to the perfectibility of society." The "Other writers" included Robert Wallace, Adam Smith, Richard Price, and David Hume. Malthus himself claimed: "The only authors from whose writings I had deduced the principle, which formed the main argument of the Essay, were Hume, Wallace, Adam Smith, and Dr. Price ...
Words: 1548 - Pages: 7
...Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views By James K. Beilby and Paul R. Eddy Eds. Student Name: Kevin M. Polito Student Number: 1516105 Essential Christian Doctrine 1 Spring 2013 – Lewis Word Count: 3,054 Introduction: A necessary and timely book “Throughout the history of the church, Christians have discussed the nature and content of God’s divine foreknowledge” So, rather innocuously, begins the introduction to the text under review. Recently, these “discussions” have become more frequent and heated due, in part, to a robust Calvinist resurgence seen throughout Christendom, especially within the United States. The places and individuals who are engaged in such debates are as varied as the ivory tower and the theologians who inhabit them all the way to the local, faithful Sunday school teacher presenting material to her students who attend her small, rural church. The debate is robust within evangelicalism because of the implications that one’s adopted view has on important questions such as: 1. The Nature of and mode of God’s foreknowledge 2. The Nature of Divine Sovereignty 3. The Nature of Human Freedom Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views is a necessary and timely book. Although, church history bears witness to a diversity of opinions regarding the nature and content of God’s divine foreknowledge, the need for careful and scholarly examination remains as relevant and important as any point in church history. An encroaching, imperious secularism...
Words: 3167 - Pages: 13
...What is the “Problem of Evil”? What is the difference, if there is a difference, between so-called “moral evil” and “natural evil”? How exactly does John Hick, in his essay “Problem of Evil”, solve the problem of both “Moral evil” and “natural evil”? Do you think that either or both, of Hick’s solutions is really able to solve what appears to be a unique problem of evil in Arthur C. Clarke’s short story, “The Star”? Unhappiness, as a whole, is a challenge to the idea of good. When one hears or discovers about the disasters or the pain and suffering of wars, violence, earthquakes and killings it is safe to ask one’s self, what the problem of evil is. Investigating the short story “Problem of Evil” written by John Hick the author talks about the differences in “moral evil” and “natural evil” while defining the main question with god and evil. Furthermore in “moral evil” and “natural evil” John Hicks explanations are studied throughout the short story titled The Star by Arthur C. Clark. The problem that is most debated among believers and non-believers of God is the problem of evil. This debate is due to the belief of the omnipotence of God, saying how he is all loving, all powerful and all knowing. For all these meanings of God, there is a major defect, if the almighty is capable of revealing these abilities then how could he let evil enter into the world. If he is all- loving, then why is there so much hatred revolving around us and ultimately, If he is all-powerful, then should...
Words: 1443 - Pages: 6
