Philosophy and Ethics: Developments, Essay Structure (Basic)

Essay Structures

Ontological Argument:

• a priori, logically necessary, analytical, deductive and ontological -> study of being
• Anselm 1st arg (‘that than which nothing greater can be conceived’ - in intellectu is trumped by de re, since the fool must also agree it is strength because it highlights how the atheist is unable to argue without sounding odd, this is reductio ad absurdum)
• Anselm 2nd arg (out of necessity rather than contingency, as it would be greater to be necessary than contingent, no infinite regression…)
• Descartes (existence, tautology, supremely perfect, predicate, triangle)
• Malcolm (supporting necessary existence as a further possible concept, impossible or necessary, not contingent)
• Plantinga (Modal argument, maximal properties, proves the existence of a possible God, only possible for God)

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

• Anselm 1st arg -> Gaunilo
• Anselm 2nd argument, support by Descartes -> Kant -> Russell 
• structure of argument -> Aquinas -> anti realism 

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Life after Death 

• reasons for life after death, (fear, moral justice, more to life, sanctity of life)
• fundamental to religions, and dualism vs monism 

Immortality of the Soul vs Resurrection

• Similarities:
• dualism (Descartes, Plato-> soul belongs to a higher realm -> Heaven and Hell, Christianity has both monism and dualism)
• eternal unchanging state in the afterlife (‘soul animated the body’ ‘God will raise him’, spiritual body)
• requirement to do good in order to enter the afterlife (Kant - decalogue of the bible, NDEs)
• Differences
• resurrection and immortality are different (resurrection we have died and moved on)
• soul does not have to be reliant on God, immortality of the soul is reliant on God in christianity 
• only the soul is immortal not the body. 

Resurrection vs Rebirth/Reincarnation

• Similarities:
• dualistic approach (soul and body, nama rupa and the body)
• both achieve and eventual immortal or eternal existence (resurrection in spiritual body, nirvana)
• scriptural guidelines
• good actions determine the benefit of afterlife (Karma nirvana, Kant, heaven vs hell)
• evidence (Dr Ian Stevenson vs Jesus)
• Differences:
• souls (Buddhism involves no soul, Christianity does)
• God (christianity is dependent in order for there to be an after life, Buddhism is self-dependent)
• loss of complete self (Buddhism loss of memories, Christianity retains memories and characteristics in the resurrected body)
• nama rupa existence before God
• one chance (rebirth is consistent, resurrection is once)

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

• Ayer verification principle -> Hick’s eschatological verification
• evidence in the bible scriptures ‘He who believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live’
• support for dualism (Descartes) -> Gilbert Ryle
• Pascal’s wager -> supports fear of death, human concept, Dawkins (meme)

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Critiques of the Relationship

• Euthyphro dilemma (does God command X because it is good, or is X good because God commands it)
• outside of God, not omnipotent, not of classical theism. therefore he himself is not wholly good because he relies on an external agent, contradiction to tautology
• 2nd, reduced to human reason, therefore not omnipotent, arbitrary religious doctrines, William of Ockham (things become right because he wills it)
• extremist approach, as no God means no morality, not the case
• Dawkins’ first argument (religion is evil, religious warfare, dangerous meme, ‘virus of the mind’ -> Hell House, Westboro Baptist Church)

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

• William Lane Craig (God is the essence of goodness, would not order something immoral, God is morality, morality exists so God exists, established link) -> euthyphro dilemma (nonsensical, because God is arbitrary, bible quote: ‘adulteress to be put to death’ -> cruel God argues against Craig, no moral choices as God makes them for us)
• Ward argues this, and indicates that there have been examples of good historical figures, ‘lazy thinking’ Dawkins, because of his choices in religious fanatics, and root of all evil can be said of Dawkins too) -> however, there is evidence that morality can exist without religion, secular society

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Deontology:

• Non-consequentialist, duty, reason, absolutist 
• Kant (reason is a priori morality, same reason same conclusion)
• categoric imperative (not hypothetical because not subjective, end it itself, mad axeman)
• maxims (principle of universalisability, kingdom of ends, and an end it itself)
• W.D.Ross maybe if you want to, it’s cool

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

• simple universal guide -> not able to be universalised, (difference cultures, poor perspective)
• cold and unfeeling, no, because not selfish -> lack of individualism, conflicting duties -> W. D. Ross (prima facie duties) -> J. S. Mill, still conflicting because abortion, 

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

Natural Moral Law:

• purpose, reason, absolutist, empirically verifiable
• Aquinas (purpose and design -> natural world and bible, purpose to be with God, free will to do this
• accessible, unchanging, applicable to all situations
• Primary precepts, secondary precepts 
• four laws -> influence on modern day

▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▂

• utilised everywhere -> purposes are different so not the case, 
• is the case because human law affects us -> yet in a secular society, God’s word is less significant 
• old fashioned, homosexuality defies primary precepts -> Bernard Hoose, proportionalist, ontic goods,