MEET at WALKER LIBRARY, Room 264A with librarian Rachel Kirk.
Remember to indicate your midterm report presentation topic preferences.
Augustine, Boethius, Anselm, Aquinas-LHP 6-8. FL 9-10, HWT 9-10
LHP
1. How did Augustine "solve" the problem of evil in his younger days, and then after his conversion to Christianity? Why wasn't it such a problem for him originally?
2. What does Boethius not mention about himself in The Consolation of Philosophy?
3. Boethius' "recollection of ideas" can be traced back to what philosopher?
4. What uniquely self-validating idea did Anselm say we have?
5. Gaunilo criticized Anselm's reasoning using what example?
6. What was Aquinas' 2nd Way?
FL
1. How did Enlightenment values advance in America in the 19th century?
2. What fantasy about 1776 has been accepted as fact by Americans across the religious spectrum (and Ronald Reagan) ever since?
3. How was religion in America, unlike Europe, non-binary?
4. How did Thomas Jefferson characterize America's religious differences in the north and the south?
5. What happened in Cane Ridge, KY in 1801, and how did a Vanderbilt historian describe it?
6. Who was Charles Finney, and what did he understand about American Christianity?
7. What did de Tocqueville say was different about religion in America, compared to Europe?
8. Who was William Miller and what beliefs did he help revive?
9. Who was Joseph Smith and what is the most interesting thing about him?
HWT
1. What fundamental and non-western sense of time has underpinned much of human history?
2. What is "dreamtime" and how is it alien to the modern west?
3. The universalism of western universities implies that what is unimportant?
4. What does John Gray say about the idea of progress?
5. Karma originally concerned what, and lacked what connotations now commonly associated with it?
6. What western ideas have displaced karma, for many young Indians?
Discussion Questions
- [Add your own DQs]
- Would the existence of evil equivalent to good, without guarantees of tthe inevitable triiumph of the latter, solve the problem of suffering?
- Why do you think Boethius didn't write "The Consolation of Christianity"?
- Do you think you have a clear idea of what it would mean for there to be an all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good supernatural being?
- Do you think knowledge is really a form of remembering or recollection? Have we just forgotten what we knew?
- Is there a difference between an uncaused cause (or unmoved mover) and a god?
- Which is the more plausible explanation of the extent of gratuitous suffering in the world, that God exists but is not more powerful than Satan, or that neither God nor Satan exists? Why?
- Are supernatural stories of faith, redemption, and salvation more comforting to you than the power of reason and evidence? Why or why not?
- What do you think of the Manichean idea that an "evil God created the earth and emtombed our souls in the prisons of our bodies"? (Dream of Reason 392)
- Do you agree with Augustine about "the main message of Christianity...that man needs a great deal of help"? (DR 395). If so, must "help" take the form of supernatural salvation? If not, what do you think the message is? What kind of help do we need?
- What do you think of Boethius' proposed solution to the puzzle of free will, that from a divine point of view there's no difference between past, present, and future? 402
- Did Russell "demolish" Anselm's ontological argument? (See below)
- COMMENT: “The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.” Carl Sagan
- COMMENT: “Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality. When we recognize our place in an immensity of light‐years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual. So are our emotions in the presence of great art or music or literature, or acts of exemplary selfless courage such as those of Mohandas Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both.” Carl Sagan
- If you were falsely imprisoned, tortured, and scheduled for execution, would you be able to achieve "consolation"? How?
- Can the definition of a word prove anything about the world?
- Is theoretical simplicity always better, even if the universe is complex?
- Does the possibility of other worlds somehow diminish humanity?
- How does the definition of God as omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good make it harder to account for evil and suffering in the world? Would it be better to believe in a lesser god, or no god at all?
- Can you explain the concept of Original Sin? Do you think you understand it?
- Is it better to embrace (or renounce) religious faith early in life, or to "sow your wild oats" and enjoy a wide experience of the world before committing to any particular tradition or belief? Were you encouraged by adults, in childhood, to make a public profession of faith? If so, did you understand what that meant or entailed?
- Does the concept of a never-ending struggle between good and evil appeal to you? Does it make sense, in the light of whatever else you believe? Would there be anything "wrong" with a world in which good was already triumphant, happiness for all already secured, kindness and compassion unrivaled by hatred and cruelty?
- Do you find the concept of Original Sin compelling, difficult, unfair, or dubious? In general, do we "inherit the sins of our fathers (and mothers)"? If yes, give examples and explain.
- What kinds of present-day McCarthyism can you see? Is socialism the new communism? How are alternate political philosophies discouraged in America, and where would you place yourself on the spectrum?
- Andersen notes that since WWII "mainline" Christian denominations were peaking (and, as evidence shows, are now declining). What do you think about this when you consider the visible political power of other evangelical denominations? Are you a part of a mainline traditon? If so, how would you explain this shift?
==
If our brains seem to be a step ahead of our minds, does that mean we do not possess free will?
Are all our actions inevitable? (Don't confuse that with ineffable.)
Is belief in free will better for some of us, while belief in determinism is better advised for others?
The first sin that Augustine remembers doing was as a child stealing pears, just to steal them. That is, it was the crime itself that made him want to do it, he didn't even want the pears, he just wanted to sin. It was his "original sin" in a sense, and he always felt most guilty about it.
==
Aquinas...
==
I share these provocative cartoons not in hostility to religion, but because they reflect genuine puzzlements some of us have regarding the seeming incongruity of saying that God is ineffable AND being confident that one knows God's precise attitudes towards quite specific human concerns... and regarding the paradox of human free will in a universe allegedly governed by omniscience. I hope we'll all choose not to take offense, but to think about and discuss the experiences of ineffability, faith, agency, the unseen objects of belief, etc.
#H02
ReplyDeleteLHP
Qn.1-
In his younger days, Augustine engaged with the problem of evil and initially found comfort in hard times because of the teachings of the Manichaeans. These teachers posited a dualistic universe where good and evil were in constant struggle. This perspective provided a straightforward explanation for the existence of evil, making it less problematic for him at the time.
However, after his conversion to Christianity, Augustine’s understanding evolved significantly. He came to view evil not as a substance or force in itself but as a privation of good. In other words, evil results from turning away from God, the ultimate good. This shift in perspective allowed Augustine to reconcile the existence of evil with an all-good, omnipotent God.
Initially, the problem of evil wasn’t as troubling for Augustine because the Manichaean dualism offered a clear, albeit simplistic, explanation. Only after his conversion and deeper reflection did he seek a more nuanced understanding.
LHP
Qn.4-
Anselm proposed the ontological argument, which is a uniquely self-validating idea. He argued that the very concept of God implies God’s existence. According to Anselm, God is defined as “that than which nothing greater can be conceived.” If we can conceive of such a being, it must exist in reality because a God that exists is greater than a God that only exists in the mind. This argument attempts to show that denying the existence of God is self-contradictory. Anselm’s argument is unique because it relies solely on reason and the definition of God rather than empirical evidence or observation. This makes it a purely philosophical argument that has been both highly influential and widely debated throughout the history of philosophy. By asserting that the very idea of God necessitates God’s existence, Anselm’s ontological argument stands as a fascinating and thought-provoking contribution to theological and philosophical discourse.
HWT
Qn.5-
Karma was initially concerned with action. It was primarily about one's actions and the consequences that followed from those actions. Over time, karma has evolved and gained various meanings and connotations.
Initially, karma lacked the moral or ethical dimensions that are now commonly associated with it. In its early usage, particularly in the Vedic texts, karma referred to ritual actions and their effects. It was more about the ritualistic and practical aspects rather than the moral implications. The idea of karma as a moral law, where good actions lead to positive outcomes and bad ones lead to negative outcomes, developed later in South Asia's philosophical and religious traditions.
Maheswari Ramesh
(Maahi)
I think this way of summarizing the ontological argument makes it easier for me to understand, and I am starting to see how Anselm's counter-argument to the "perfect island" point makes a bit of sense; the way I understand it is that an island that is actually God would be the greatest possible island.
DeleteHunter Dickson ^^^
DeleteH03
ReplyDelete(LHP, Question 4)
1. Anselm reasoned that the fact we are able to think of God proves that he must exist. I initially wrote some more about how exactly he outlined this argument, but honestly I can't really internalize it well enough to summarize in a comprehensible way. I agree that we can imagine an all-powerful God, and that IF God were to really exist, that 'real' God would probably be more powerful than the God I imagine, but I'm not sure how those two pillars of reason necessarily result in the assertion that God must therefore exist.
(LHP, Question 5)
2. Leading off my last response, I subsequently agree with Gaunilo's criticism of Anselm's argument. Gaunilo describes the idea of a perfect island, and how just because it is possible for us to conceive that such an island filled with exotic trees, plants, animals, and fruits does not mean that such an island actually exists. I find Anselm's rebuttal that his argument only applies to God since he is 'the most perfect everything' unconvincing. How can we say with such surety that an all-powerful God is somehow apart from the idea of an all-perfect island? It's all taking place in the realm of our conceptualization, there's no way to be 100% sure that they are of a different class.
(LHP, Question 6)
Aquinas 'second way', outlined in his book Summa Theologica, was the First Cause Argument. His theory was that following the, "What caused that? ...and what caused that?" series of questioning must inevitably terminate at God, the, "uncaused cause of everything that is." I'm more inclined to side with the criticisms of this theory. If it is true that there is an uncaused cause at some point, why does it necessarily have to be God? For example, the popular theory of the Big Bang similarly falls into this category of the uncaused cause (kind of). And why is it that there cannot be an infinite series of causes? Perhaps the universe is metaphysically infinite, extending up and down in size as a chain of causes and parts that go on forever. I don't think we can say for certain either way.
#H01
ReplyDeleteLHP-1
Augustine first understood the problem of evil in his younger days by adopting the Manichaeism doctrine. This doctrine described two equal forces of good and evil ( God and Satan) both fighting for power but neither being able to overtake the other. After converting to Christianity he reasoned with this struggle through the concept of Man's own free will. Humans can choose to do 'good' or 'bad', and there will be consequences of either.
LHP-2
Boethius failed to write that he was an early Christian in his work " The Consolation of Philosophy". I am not entirely sure as to why, or if that would have even been a relevant statement in his work. Maybe he was upset at God or the way he was being treated. Regardless, the Philosophy God somewhat parallels to the Christian idea of God.
LHP-6
Aquinas' 2nd way was the first cause argument. The main claim of his theory was that if everything did not need a first cause to exist we would have a series of infinite causes going on for eternity with no beginning and no end. Similar to stacking up dominos and pushing one over to hit the other and so on creating an infinite regress. This seems to be a further stretch than believing someone knocked over the first domino to set the causes in motion. Newton's 1st law could also be a way of viewing Aquinas theory, " An object at rest remains at rest, and an object in motion remains in motion at constant speed and in a straight line unless acted on by an unbalanced force."
Roman Phillips #03
ReplyDeleteLHP
2. In the book The Consolation of Philosophy, Boethius fails to mention that he was an early Christian. Having realized happiness must come from something that could not be easily taken away, Boethius believed true happiness would be found in God or goodness. In the beginning of the book, the God that Philosophy described could be Plato's God, who was the pure Form of goodness. However, readers would focus on the Christian teachings about the importance of focusing on pleasing God instead of the worthlessness of honor and riches. Boethius realized that worrying about things outside of his control were futile and what truly mattered was he had a choice about his attitude toward his situation.
FL
2. Enlightenment values advanced in America in the 19th Century because education became free and required in the United States. Reading, learning, and science were integral parts of American progress which improved literacy rates by ninety percent and as a result, access to newspapers and books significantly increased. Eventually, libraries, public colleges, and universities were created further advancing technology and new ideas.
3. Christians in Europe had two choices if they subscribed to state sanctioned church - either Protestant or Catholic. America was different because of all the various choices. Colonists left England to have religious freedoms, but those same colonists spread and conjured fantastic new ideas about religion. Before the Revolution, most of the colonies had a state church, but eventually, the Constitution outlawed those same state churches. Each and every set of beliefs and practices were deemed equal to the others. In America, American Protestantism is easily split into new sects.
5. In 1801 in Cane Ridge Kentucky, a Holy Fair event was scheduled. Numerous ministers (Methodist, Presbyterian, and Baptist) were invited to preach over the three day period just outside of Lexington. Hoping to attract a big audience, the organizers were astonished that 20,000 people arrived to hear the gospel and be a part of this once-in-a-lifetime event. The event ended up lasting a week and Cane Ridge's temporary population grew to the size of Charleston. Vanderbilt historian Paul Conkin and Harold Bloom of Yale have noted that Cane Ridge was the "Woodstock of American Christianity." After the success of this event, more Baptist and Methodist preachers organized camp meetings hoping to grow Christianity.
H03
ReplyDeleteLHP
2. Boethisus fails to mention that he was a christian in his book.Wether he believed he would be ridiculed for being one or did not want his religious affiliation to be the center point, we may never know.
5. Gaunilo criticized Anslem's point by making an analogy to imagining a perfect island. Since it is impossible to imagine a perfect island, in order for it to be perfect it must exist. By extension, if you cannot imagine a perfect island, than how can you imagine a perfect god?
6. Aquinas' 2nd way was the First Cause Argument. The idea was that something had to have caused the universe to come into being, and Aquinas refused to believe in infinite regression. Infinite regression being the idea that everything is caused by something that came before, and that was caused by something that came before that, and so on.
It's interesting to think of all the many reasons why Boethius didn't mention the fact that he was a Christian. I'd like to think that it wasn't out of shame for the fact, but you're right, we will never know.
Delete1. In his earlier days, Augustine followed the Manichean's way of seeing good and evil in a constant battle against each other. While he did believe in the difference between the two, Augustine wanted to find the meaning of why the world wasn't just good because God could make it that way. This was not a problem for Augustine originally because he grew up thinking that evil and good existed separately, but after converting to Christianity, he realized that evil is just a privation of good.
ReplyDelete2. Boethius never mentions that he is imprisoned in The Consolation of Philosophy, and this is likely due to his focus on the generality of Philosophy while writing this book. He chooses to leave out his poor circumstance in light of sharing the topic of Philosophy on a broader scale, and this adds to the character of the book immensely.
3. Anselm argued that God exists because we can think of nothing greater than him in our minds. Since we can't conceive a greater being than that of God in our minds, he must exist because he amounts to a collection of thoughts greater than any power in the world. This is called a priori because it bases the evidence of God existing off of God which is tied to something religious. It's confusing me, but this idea is uniquely self-validating in the fact that Anselm just said God exists because we can't think of anything else greater than Him.
I agree that Anselm's ideology about God's existence is confusing. I believe in God, but it's definitely not because of the same reason that Anselm believed. I think he missed an important part of Christianity: faith.
Delete^H01
ReplyDeleteSorry, I forgot to mark my name as Kenji.
Kenji Matsumura
LHP-4: Anselm proposed the Ontological Argument for the existence of God, which is based on a uniquely self-validating idea: the concept of God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived." Anselm argued that once we understand this definition, we can logically conclude that God must exist both in the mind and reality because a being that exists in reality is greater than one that exists only in the mind.
ReplyDeleteLHP-5: Gaunilo, a contemporary of Anselm, criticized the Ontological Argument by using the example of a perfect island. He argued that just because we can conceive of the greatest, most perfect island does not mean that it truly exists. His point was that Anselm's reasoning could be applied to imaginary things, leading to absurd conclusions.
LHP-6: Aquinas' Second Way is one of his "Five Ways" to prove the existence of God. It is known as the Argument from Causation. Aquinas argued that everything in the world has a cause, and nothing can cause itself. Therefore, there must be a first cause, which itself is uncaused, this first cause must be God which he argued for. This is a cosmological argument for God's existence.
H02:
ReplyDelete1. Augustine "solved" the problem with his older beliefs of two being who are of equal power, one being all good and one all evil, that were constantly in battle. After he later converted to Christianity, he used the figures of Satan and God for the figures of battle. It wasn't a problem for him originally because his previous gods weren't assumed to be all powerful and all knowing like God is claimed to be.
5. Gaunilo used the example of imagining a perfect island, and telling you that it has to exist just because of your ability to imagine it into existence.
2. Boethius never mentions that he is an early Christian. This could be due to a plethora of reasons, but it is unknown to this day why he did such a thing.
#H02
ReplyDeleteLHP 1. Augustine solved this problem by converting to Christianity, becoming a Bishop, and asked God to make him stop having sexual desires. After his conversion to Christianity (although this happened many years later) he was deemed a Saint. The reason it wasn’t a problem for him originally is because he didn’t grow up around heavy Christianity.
LHP 2. What Boethius does not mention in “The Consolation of Philosophy” is that he was an early Christian.
LHP 3. This “recollection of ideas” can be traced back to philosopher Plato.
H02
ReplyDeleteLHP
1 - Before his conversion, Augustine was a Manichean. They believed that God was not supremely powerful and then good and evil were equal yet opposing forces. The fact that they were both equal explained why bad things happen in the world as well as good things. After converting, Augustine adopted the belief that humans have free will and that being led astray by evil forces is why people do bad things. The reason this was much simpler for Augustine in his earlier years was because good and evil being equals made more sense for bad things to happen rather than under the authority of an all powerful and all good God.
2 - Boethius does not mention his faith in Christianity in his Consolation of Philosophy. I believe that he chose to leave this out because philosophy can be discussed in a broad sense, not just a religious sense. However, Boethius's writing in this book does hint at the teachings of Christianity.
3 - Anselm believed that because we have an idea of what or who God is, it is therefore true that God must exist. Since God is an all powerful being and we cannot think of another being or thing greater than Him, God must exist. This idea is quite self-validating because it uses God to provide proof of God.
H01
ReplyDeleteLHP 1- Augustine was originally Manichaean, and believed in the endless power struggle between good (God) and evil (Satan). This is why evil existed in the world, because sometimes Satan got the upper hand. Sometimes the unpure body, which held all desires and weaknesses, took control over the pure soul and caused moral evils in the world. But as he grew up and converted to Christianity, he came to believe that evil existed because of free will. God gives humans the choice to be good or evil and some people pick evil. That's just what comes with free will. The main belief in him that changed though was God's amount of power. Manichaeans didn't believe God was all-powerful, that's why Satan sometimes had more control, and that's why it was less of a problem to him. But Christians do believe God is all-powerful, and so once he started agreeing with them, his ideas about evil had to convert also.
3- Boethius' "recollection of ideas" theory can be traced back to Plato, who believed that all learning is just recollecting ideas we already had. I think I disagree fundamentally on this topic, because there is nothing besides physical instincts that humans intrinsically know without learning. Everything is taught to us by the people and situations around us, even if we don't recognize it as such. Subjects can be reitorated or expanded upon later in life, but there is plenty of learning that is fundamentally new information.
5- Gaunilo criticized Anselm's reasoning for the existence of God using the example of a perfect island. Anselm believed that the fact that we have an idea of God proves the existence of him. But the perfect island example shows how silly Gaunilo thought's Anselm's reasoning. If someone were to tell you that the perfect island must exist somewhere out in the ocean simply because you can imagine it, you would think it was a joke. How can you know the island is there? Just because you can imagine it doesn't mean it's real. Anselm argued that his reasoning only worked with God because "he is the most perfect of everything". To be entirely honest, none of this makes much sense to me. I don't think I really understand Anselm's argument, although who knows if it's because of the spotty logistics or the fact that I'm not religious. As a logical person, his proof was incomplete.
H01
ReplyDeleteLHP 3. Boethius’ “recollection of ideas” traces back to the teachings of Plato. Plato believed that everything we learn is like a jogging of our memory; everything we know we have already known but forgotten over time. I find it really interesting that Boethius chose to have the character of Philosophy remind him of what he already knows. What was his message or intention behind this, and was it meant for possible readers or himself? Perhaps writing about something related to Plato’s teachings helped free him from his worries about imprisonment.
LHP 6. Aquinas’ 2nd Way, called the “First Cause Argument”, states that the “cause-and-effect” chain could not be infinite, that it must have started from something or someone. Aquinas argued that everything- from the cosmos to a football- has a cause that brought it into being. He was convinced that there is no possibility of a continuous cause-and-effect for all things, and so there must be a God that started this chain. He further argued that the first cause for all creation was God, an “uncaused cause”. Aquinas’ argument has multiple objections, such as the beginning of this series is not necessarily “all-knowing” like a God. I find the debate on creation fascinating because there seems to be no way (at least currently) for us to discover how the universe was created.
HWT 1. The idea that time is circular, rather than linear, is shared amongst most eastern cultures. Many philosophies and religions based in eastern regions think of time as seasonal, and apply this thought to the phases of life as well. To them, there is a rotation of “good” and “bad” (for lack of a better word) times similar to the rotation of spring, summer, fall, and winter. Western cultures have a more linear view on time, seeing it only moving from one point to another, beginning to end. We can see these different perspectives of time in many cultural, philosophical, and religious views throughout the world.
H03
ReplyDeleteLHP
1: Since Augustine was originally a Manichaean he belived that there was a neverending battle between good and evil in the world and that God was not all powerful thus the battle constantly took place and evil could exist in the world,. This view was problematic (because Christians believe God is all powerful) after he became a christian and eventually came to the conclusion God gave humanity free will which entailed the ability to choose evil actions.
3: The recollection of ideas can be traced back to Plato who believed that humans already have ideas they just need to be recalled and thus life is just a struggle to recall those lost memories.
5: Gaunilo criticized Anselm's example using an example of a perfect Island pointing out that it doesn't make sense that a perfect island exists just because someone conjured it in their mind therefore it must be real. For that reason he didn't support the idea that since we image God as the greatest being imagineable he must exist because the real God is the greatest thing in the universe.
#H01
ReplyDeleteLHP
1. Augustine "solved" the problem of evil by simply avoiding the thought of it. He denied the thought that God wanted evil to happen through the Manichaean religion. Manichaeans believed that God wasn't supremely powerful. They believed that there was a never-ending struggle going on between equal forces of good and evil. When Augustine converted to Christianity, he turned to the existence of free will. Free will allows for people to have their own choice of their actions, and since we are inherently sinners, that causes moral evil to occur in the world.
2. In The Consolation of Philosophy, Boethius does not mention that he was an early Christian.
3. Boethius' "recollection of ideas" can be traced back to Plato. Plato believed that all learning is really a kind of recollection of ideas we already have. He believed that we never really learn anything new, we just have our memories jogged.
H#2
ReplyDeleteLHP #1 - Augustine was able to solve the problem of evil when he was young because he believed in a religion which held the belief that god was not all powerful and was actually in a constant struggle with satan which is why there were times of good and evil. This changed after he made his conversion to Christianity because he started to believe that since god gave us free will, he allowed us to make our own decisions and it was the peoples choices to do evil. God wouldn't interfere with our decisions because it almost seemed unfair to constantly force everyone to do good. We would basically be puppets. This question wasn't a problem for him originally because again the struggle of good and evil would sway people and they believed that when evil was winning it caused people to do evil.
LHP#2 - Boethius was an early Christian;however, he doesn't mention it once in his book. However I feel like from what the depiction of philosophy and him conversed about you could draw assumptions.
LHP#5 - Gaunilo rejected Anselm's reasonings which were basically that if you can imagine a perfect being like god then a god must exist;however, Guanilo used the example of the most perfect island. He believed that if you said that there was a perfect island that had everything and sounded too good to be true, people would scoff and think you're making things up. Just because you can imagine a perfect island doesn't mean it exists. By putting this reasoning into real life and not just a controversial point like god, the reasoning really breaks down and has no proof behind it.
LHP#6 - Aquinas' 2nd way was that he believed if you went on an infinite string of asking what created blank you would eventually reach a point where there was no answer. He believed that this would be the case no matter what you chose and he felt that the answer to this "uncaused cause" was God. He believed that at the very beginning god had to have created everything and been the first link to start it all off.
H03
ReplyDeleteLHP
1. Originally, Augustine subscribed to Manichaeism, an early religion that proclaims that God and the Devil, and by extension, good and evil, are at even odds in a constant battle. The Problem of Evil could be dismissed, as this idea of God is fighting against evil but is simply not strong enough to entirely overpower it, so when bad things happen, it's more than likely out of this God's control. The Problem of Evil was not much of a problem for Augustine and the Manichaeans because God does not consciously ignore evil; instead, "he" cannot feasibly stop it. After Augustine converted to Christianity, he began to believe that God's permission of evil is his way of granting humans "free will." Augustine believed that God blessed humans with the free will to commit evil as a means of allowing them freedom and humanity. I find this logic somewhat contrived. It doesn't do much in the way of defending God from "his" permissiveness towards evil and suffering. Sure, it's one man's free will which allows him to choose to kill his neighbor, but his neighbor is not allowed the same free will to not be slashed. Why should freedom to commit evil trump justice if God is truly just and merciful? Furthermore, while I appreciate the sentiment that I should have the autonomy to be as debaucherous and sinful as I please, but why would I want that autonomy if partaking in such privileges will damn me to hell?
4. One of Anselm's pieces of evidence for God's existence was humans' initial conception of God as an idea. He believed that, since the alleged God is said to be the greatest and most powerful being in existence, then there can be no greater imagined thing. Therefore, the fact that we can comprehend the idea of an almighty God is proof of its existence because, without provocation, humans cannot imagine such a powerful being. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the logic behind Anselm's point because, frankly, I'm confused. Surely, it's not impossible for one to proclaim, "Yes! There is a being who is above all! I call him God. Hark! For he is the creator of the universe and everything in it." Like, why is that beyond the realm of human imagination? Plenty of different cultures have painted their own ideas of who "God" is. Was the first person to do it really so special? The way I see it, humans have become too intelligent, too cognizant of their own existence for their minds to handle. It's an unfortunate side effect of evolution. We are desperate to justify our own existence, so we spin a narrative that gives us purpose. Anyway, just because I think that God could exist doesn't mean that he does. That's a reach.
6. Aquinas's 2nd Way, or the First Cause Argument, essentially states that, in order to trace the root cause of the existence of all things, we have to trace infinitely back, finding each cause's cause until, eventually, we are drawn to the "logical" conclusion that there was a holy power that incited it all. I find Aquinas's reasoning more sound than Anselm's, but it still does not entirely convince me. I believe wholeheartedly that humans will never be intelligent enough to trace all of natural history back to the origin of all matter. Because of this, I understand why some may feel compelled to explain it away with something more than the simple, coincidental "spark" that set it all in motion. How could you comprehend a root cause when, realistically, that root cause would also need a root cause. I don't find it farfetched to say that some omnipotent being did it all. But, then, what created that? Sure, you can say that the being has always been there, but isn't that just as out there as saying that everything happened because of some other, non-religious meaning. What it comes down to s the presence or absence of God during our lives and the lives of those before us. It's a bit of a fruitless effort to justify God with the mysterious nature of the start of all things because we'll probably never truly know. So, Aquinas will have to work harder to prove God to me.
H01
ReplyDeleteLHP #1:
Augustine, in his early years, believed that God was not omnipotent, and that he was in a constant battle with the force of evil. This does seem to provide a pretty simple explanation for evil in the world. Also, on a different note, I think it is interesting how we think in terms of good and evil. It would be strange if there were third and fourth options that were not quite good and not quite evil. I don't even mean somewhere in the middle, but just something different.
LHP #3:
This idea of recalling what you already know originates with Plato. I think that there is not much practical use in whether or not this is true, since it would not seem to change the way that you live. You would essentially have to search for knowledge the same way you would if you were learning new things that you did not already know. It is an interesting thought, however, and seems to fit with Plato's idea of Forms, since there is a sense in which we are pulling ideas from somewhere else rather than generating them ourselves in both of these concepts.
HWT #1:
The idea of cyclical time underpins much of human history. I don't think that either of these two ideas (cyclical or linear time), on their faces, seem more plausible than the other. I think that there are things that are interesting about both of them, and they both come with their own questions and concerns. I also thought that the idea of time related to place the way that Australian Aboriginal cultures conceptualized it was fascinating and difficult to understand. It sounds like something that is so basic and foundational that I may never experience it as clearly as someone who is from that philosophical background.
Baggini, Julian. HOW THE WORLD THINKS. Granta Books, 2019
Warburton, Nigel. A LITTLE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. Yale University Press, 30 Oct. 2012
#H1 - Zoe Kuhn
ReplyDeleteLHP - #1
Augustine solves the problem of evil in his younger days with the Free Will Defense basically saying that God gave us the option to choose whether to do good or bad and it was up to us to make that decision. This wasn’t originally such a problem for Augustine because he was told through the Manichaens that God didn’t have full control over everything in the world.
LHP - #2
2. What does Boethius not mention about himself in The Consolation of Philosophy?
Boethius does not mention that he was an early Christian in The Consolation of Philosophy.
LHP - #3
Boethius’ “recollection of ideas” can be traced back to Plato.
#H01
ReplyDeleteLHP
1.Augustine solved the problem of evil with the free will defense. God gave us the option of free will/ chose whether to make good or bad choices. This problem was not a big deal to Augustine because he was a Manichaeans. Manichaeans believed God was not the supreme God, instead there was a struggle between good and evil in all of us.
2. Boethius does not mention he in a christian in his book.
3. Boethius recollection of ideas can be traced to Pluto. Pluto believed that we learn new things by rejogging our memory.
#H01
ReplyDeleteLHP
1) In his younger days Augustine “solved” the problem of evil in his younger days by “avoiding believing that God wanted evil to happen. Originally, Augustine stared off a Manichean, which they believed that God was not supremely powerful. They believed in a never-ending struggle between the forces of good and evil. This belief is vastly different from Christian beliefs, as they accept that there can be powers of evil, but these powers were never as strong as God’s power. Later in his life, Augustine came to reject the Manichean approach, due to his aversion to agreeing with the never-ending struggle between good and evil, therefore; adopted the Christian beliefs.
2) In Boethius’ The Consolation of Philosophy, he does not mention that he is an early Christian. I found this quite interesting because why? Why did he not state his religion? His book addresses Christian questions without reference to Christianity, which I think is odd and unusual. Boethius thought of Christianity truths equivalent to philosophical truths. Although, all religions are philosophical, but not all philosophy is religious.
3) Boethius’ “recollection of ideas” can be traced back to the philosopher Plato. Plato “believed that all learning is really is really a kind of recollection ideas we already have” and that we do not learn anything new we just suddenly remember something we had forgotten. Plato’s theory does not make any sense to me. When I learn something new for the first time, I know that I have never learned that specific thing and would recall if I had ever been taught that specific thing before. I do think that we use past knowledge to deduce and guide us to new knowledge/information.
H01
ReplyDeleteopen discussion questions:
Q) If you were falsely imprisoned, tortured, and scheduled for execution, would you be able to achieve "consolation"? How?
If I were falsely accused and imprisoned, I don’t think I could achieve consolation in anyway. No matter what religion or philosophy I followed. I do think I could come to acceptance, that the way things turned out I was to be executed no matter what. The psychological experiment on learned helplessness (conducted in the 60s by Martin Seligman, on dogs) showed when exposed to repeated shocks that they could not control, the animals refrained from taking action when they could prevent the shocks. I take this to believe that if I had been imprisoned and tortured, at that point I would give up on any appeals or court appearances to redeem myself.
Q) Does the possibility of other worlds somehow diminish humanity?
No, humanity isn’t special because we might exist in singularity. All we know is our planet and our existence. The value of our species doesn’t rely on the fact that we are unique, we aren’t here to enrich the galaxy, we simply exist. So, another equally intelligent or higher lifeform would just be enriching the universe
Q) How does the definition of God as omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good make it harder to account for evil and suffering in the world? Would it be better to believe in a lesser god, or no god at all?
Different forms and denominations of Christianity portray God in different lights. Some of my previous religious figures have said that God has equal power and authority while evil only has power. So the suffering of the world is from satans power but God has the authority to heal the suffering. Others have told me good and evil are equal on every level and constantly at war over all souls, meaning its up to each individual to help God and good win. To me, no explanation made sense because the fundamentals of my faith was that god was omniscient and good. I think it may have made me believe God was some lesser entity than He was made out to be, since I was told if you had nothing but full conviction and belief in God then Satan was winning the battle over your soul. Which made me think evil was winning my soul even though I tried to be a faithful follower of Christianity.
Q) Is it better to embrace (or renounce) religious faith early in life, or to "sow your wild oats" and enjoy a wide experience of the world before committing to any particular tradition or belief? Were you encouraged by adults, in childhood, to make a public profession of faith? If so, did you understand what that meant or entailed?
While my friends raised atheist or agnostic seemed to have an easier time grappling with good and evil, I am grateful for the way I grew up. We quickly made it out of the toxic religious environment, my mom became a priest and teaches children’s worship focused around wonder and mystery. I experienced my share of religious pressure early in life, but I am incredibly lucky to have parents who learn and embrace other religions. My mom is genuinely one of the most heroic people I know and I hope the way that she teaches the bible to kids now will save them from the types of religious pressure more of us faced.
#H01
ReplyDeleteFaith Carbonari
LHP 2.- In "The Consolation of Philosophy," Boethius doesn't mention that he himself was an early christian. This could partly be due to his viewpoint and perspective on Philosophy."
LHP 4.- Anselm claimed the self-validating idea that since we had the idea of God, He must exist. He explains how if this supposedly all-knowing deity was greater than anything we could conceive, then it must exist, we just can't understand the extent of His existence. To summarize, he basically means that if something exists both in real life and in your head, it must be true.
"Do you think knowledge is really a form of remembering or recollection? Have we just forgotten what we know?" -
I don't agree with this, actually. I think to an extent we know basic things from the start of our lives, but the best way to learn something new is through new mistakes and experiences. I know that's how I learned a lot of what I know. If you learn a new subject or lesson, it's not always just recollection. Assuming that's true is invalidating any education you've ever received.
H03 - Quinny VanDerSlik
ReplyDeleteLHP 1-
Before Augustine converted to Christianity, he would avoid the problem of evil when he was younger. He originally was a Manichaean, someone who believed that God was not all powerful, and that there was a constant struggle between good and evil. Afterwards, when he converted, he instead wanted to know why evil was allowed to continue and sought out solutions, the main one was based on free will, that our rational sides would keep us controlled. Originally the problem of solving the issue of evil was not a problem to him, as he could argue that evil was going to be constant as God did not truly have all the power.
LHP 5-
Gaunilo criticizes Anselm’s reasoning through the example of a perfectly imagined island and god relate to each other. He points out that the two arguments have the same form. So, if one does not believe the perfect island can exist, then why believe in god? Anselm’s arguments started to contradict each other by sharing the same format of ideas.
LHP 6-
Aquinas came up with a book called Summa Theologica, in the book he outlines Five arguments which demonstrate how God exists: the Five Ways. Even two hundred years after Anselm, his argument lived on through Aquinas’ arguments, all five of them reflect Anselm’s thinking. The Second Way was the First Cause Arguments, it was based on one Aristotle used. Aquinas explains that everything exists as it has a cause which made it exist or be invented, but how did the material to make those items come into existence? All of these materials can be traced back to the times they form or the beginning of the earth and so on, however, Aquinas argues if it can go on forever backwards? He believed that there could NOT be a never-ending loop of cause and effect for why items and materials exist. If there was an infinite regress, then there would be no original cause, no First Cause. In the end he believes that was an original cause but one that was not caused by the series of cause-and-effect. The uncaused cause is what he calls God, he is the First Cause in actuality.
How does the definition of God as omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good make it harder to account for evil and suffering in the world? Would it be better to believe in a lesser god, or no god at all?
DeleteWhen the concept of someone all powerful is presented, people start to question the morality of others actions. If we have been given free will, we have also been given no limits in what we can do with that free will ethically and morally. By presenting the problem of good and evil, others start to see the all powerful being as a default of why something evil or bad has occurred. One being in charge of all evil, bad and actions makes those doubt them, especially when they’re revered for being perfectly good. So, if they are the one that holds all the power and are supposed to be good, then why have they allowed evil to fester, how can all this bad in the end be good for us? Why must we suffer at the hands of someone we believe to be good? All of this makes it harder to believe in God as a being that is good, which in the end casts doubt on if they are even worse when trying to explain when evil and suffering occurs. That is why some religions have multiple gods or goddesses, they have split the responsibilities up between them, so not just one is inherently or strictly good or evil. Having many gods or goddesses makes it easier to believe in them, as not one is just and responsible, not one is good while submitting their believer to suffering and harm.
Do you think knowledge is really a form of remembering or recollection? Have we just forgotten what we knew?
DeleteI have wondered if it would be possible for us to be born with knowledge, about what if we already had this knowledge but we just have unlocked it yet? While knowledge can be a form of remembering or recollection, I do not believe that it was already ingrained in our minds and we just had not yet regained it. We still have to learn all different types of subjects and knowledge, it is not all inherently given to us at birth but locked away. There can be some aspects of knowledge that could be inherently known, one of which could be how we express emotions or how we know that if we do certain things an object will fall, we might not know what falling is or that pushing is what causes it exactly, but we have an idea I believe.
#H02
ReplyDeleteLHP-1
Augustine's original belief was that the universe was governed by 2 equally powerful God's with 2 conflicting wills, one good and one bad. This was an explanation to his biggest problem, how an entirely good God could allow evil in the universe. However, as Augustine matured, he came to believe that good would ultimately overcome evil in the end, and through this belief he was forced to accept that God and goodness had dominion over things which were in conflict with God's will. Thus he continued to struggle with how a good God could allow the evil in the world, until he reached the conclusion that evil was not necessarily the will of God but was necessary for bringing about free will into the universe. God created beings that had the ability to turn to things which were in conflict with his own will. To give them this ability he allowed our world to be governed by evil so that a great enough temptation to turn from God would exist for people to actually have a decision.
LHP-2
Boethius did not mention the fact he was Christian in The Consolation of Philosophy, which is an interesting point that can have many different interpretations. One possibility is that he believed it was obviously implied. Christianity was the primary religion in the world that was pushing for a monotheistic God, which may have caused him to believe that by talking about a monotheistic God that ruled objectively over the universe, readers would already understand who he was talking about. Another possibility is that he wanted to assure the continuation of his work, by keeping the identity of the God hidden so that multiple religions and groups would adapt his work. However, it the true answer will likely never be known.
LHP 5
Gaunilo believed that Anslem's line of logic was flawed for his method of "proving" the existence of God. Gaunilo pointed out that just because someone can imagine or desire the "perfect being" or in his analogy "the perfect island" that doesn't mean that the island exists. In the same way he could not agree that the concept of perfection or God was proof that God existed. Anslem disagreed with his view as he believed the concept of perfection for the island was based on the concept of the perfection of God, and therefore his method still held true.
LHP1: In his younger day Augustine "solved" this problem by coming to the conclusion that evil and good come from separate forces. He concluded that there is a never-ending battle between good and evil. Sometimes evil prevails however, it is quickly retaken and good falls into action. He came to this conclusion because he was perplexed by how an all good and loving God would allow evil in the world. Later in life he concluded that if God was truly all powerful he would have defeated evil by now. This conclusion perplexed him even more. He then blamed it on free will. There is a righteous way and lost path in life. One that is good and one that is evil. He determined this to be free will and that the reason evil exists is because people follow what is evil.
ReplyDeleteLHP2: In "The Consolation of Philosophy" Boethius does not mention the fact he is a Christian. I think he did this so people could interpret his ideas in whatever way they choose. Whether they approach it religiously or philosophically. The Goddess of philosophy
LHP4 Anslem said that the idea of God proves that it exists. If there is a concept of one, then they exist.
H02
ReplyDeleteLHP:
1. In Augustines younger days, he believed that god was balancing to forces of good and bad. The forces of good and evil was a never ending battle, essentially God and Satan fighting for eternity. However, as Augustine converted to christianity, he rationalized the concept of free will and how it is the decision maker of good and evil.
3. Boethius's recollection of ideas can be traced back to Plato because Plato believed that learning is just a recollection of ideas we already have. This. thinking is popularly tied back to plato.
4. Anselm said we have the idea to picture God and his/her being, and know the existence of God is real because if we can understand and picture the idea of God then we know there is no chance that he cannot be real.
#H02
ReplyDeleteLHP
#1 - In Augustine's younger years, he believed that evil exists in the world from forces of good and evil. It was never a problem for him because that was his religion. However, he rejected this idea as he grew older, as it still challenged the idea that God is all-powerful as said in the Bible. After his conversion to Christianity, he posited the idea of free will. He believed that God gave humans free will, which they could utilize to either do morally good or bad based on their decisions.
#2 - Boethius fails to mention that he was an early Christian. This could be because of his description of the character Philosophy as god-like. It could have possibly come off as blasphemous to his audience.
#3 - Boethius' "recollection of ideas" can be traced back to Plato. Plato believed that no one truly learns knowledge, they just remember ideas of said knowledge.
H02
ReplyDeleteLHP #1: Augustine, during his younger years, believed that there were two separate spiritual forces; one of goodness and light, the other of darkness and evil. The problem of evil within his religion during his younger years wasn't a problem for him because he followed the notion that God couldn't control all of reality, and there was a separate dark force at play that caused the negative aspects of society. With his conversion to Christianity later in life, he had to reject this idea to abide by his new religious principles. The conflict now revolved around questions such as "Why couldn't God defeat the evil forces?" or "Why did this almighty figure allow awful things to happen?" To relieve this religious turmoil, he proposed the idea of free will; God gave us this world to live in, and it is not his fault for the moral wrongdoings that take place. However, this debate still surrounds modern-day Christianity and plays a role in turning people away from the religion.
LHP #3: Boethius' "recollection of ideas" is linked back to the work of Plato. Plato believed that we don't learn anything new; instead, we are constantly back and forth to recover pieces of what we already know. In the context of Boethius' situation, this is seen in how, internally, he already knows that his worries and distress over losing his wealth, freedom, and public stance are wrong. As a philosopher, he knows that anxieties over things you can't control and temporary pleasures are lousy logic. Boethius just needed a reminder and to be pushed in the right direction.
LHP #5: Gaunilo criticized Anselm's logic on God's existence with the following example: if you are told to imagine this luxurious island that contains all the riches you could ever dream of, and they tell you because this island is better than any other island then the island must exist in reality since it is so easy to imagine in your mind. This defeats Anselm's "proof" of God's existence because it displays how simply because your mind can visualize something so perfect, that doesn't mean it exists in reality. I agree with Gaunilo's view of Anselm's idea, as it does defeat the argument he was trying to make.
H2
ReplyDeleteFL 3- When it says that American Christianity was non-binary it means that unlike in Europe at the time you could practice any religion as long as you weren't hurting people. In Europe you could only pick the state religion or no religion, so the people who came to America had widely different views from each other.
FL 5- In Cane Ridge, Kentucky two preachers set out to have an annual festival where a dozen or so preachers went out and preached to the masses for days. This idea was even more successful than even they thought bringing in 20 thousand people to this festival. They were forced to extend the festival from 3 days to a week and during that time people were having extreme reactions to the preachers. Some people had seizures while others prayed for hours on end weeping. It was so chaotic that a Vanderbilt historian related it to the Woodstock festival where everyone was completely out of control. Whether it was true spiritual happenings or mass hysteria we can only guess but either way it shows how fanatical and spiritual Christians in the U.S were at the time.
FL 9- Joseph Smith is the creator of the Church of Mormon/Church of Latter Day Saints. From a young age he would swindle people by using magic stones to find riches underneath their lands and he did this for quite awhile before he encountered an angel that was never spoken of in the Bible that told him there was more scripture buried 4 miles south of his house on hieroglyphics in America. He went on to "translate" the tablets and created a new sect of Christianity which was based on what most call "fan fiction" and I couldn't call it anything better than that. The craziest thing about him though is that he had an extraordinary amount of followers. The group delusions inside early latter day saints still amazes me. He was eventually arrested and killed while in jail at the age of 38. In his time alive he accrued 30 or so wives with many of them being teenage girls. In my opinion, he doesn't sound like a religious figure, he sounds like a cult leader.
LHP:
ReplyDelete2. In the Consolation of Philosophy, Boethius does not mention his Christianity. When he mentions this divine being “Philosophy” and her teachings, it is said material possessions are worthless. What you need is something more central to yourself, such as a religion. For Boethius, that central belief that he holds close to himself would be the Christian God.
3. Boethius’ “recollection of ideas” can be traced back to Plato. They both believed that there are no “new” ideas, just re-emergence of past ones. This also ties in with some Christian belief, where some denominations believe they were born with innate virtues, and any sinful acts are just due to the lack of “exercising”
6. Aquinas’ second Way was the “First Cause” argument. He believed that there had to have been a primary cause for the universe to exist. It can't just be endless effects. I find myself entertained by this idea often, as well. A part of my departure from Christian belief stems from the lack of logic I could find in any of it. Where did God come from? If God’s real, then why isn’t he helping? Where is God?
Gavin Cooley H2
ReplyDeleteLHP
1. Augustine believed in the Manichaean concept that good and evil were in a constant battle, with neither able to overtake the other.Thus, God was not responsible for the evil of the world; he was actively trying to combat it, but it wasn't always a winnable battle. After his conversion to Christianity, Augustine argued that God gave humans free will, which is inherently good for them, but also gives them the capacity for both good and evil. The idea that led to his conversion was the belief God was truly all powerful. He believed that God was not equal in power to evil; he was stronger. Thus he reasoned there must be some other reason that there is so much evil in the world.
2. Boethius does not mention that he is an early Christian. Different people interpreted the God in the book as either Plato's God or the Christian God, the latter of which is likely what Boethius intended.
3. The concept of learning as just recalling one's old ideas was originally from Plato. Plato believed that everything we learn was already a concept in our head, we just had to bring it forth and shine a light on it. In Boethius's case, this involved recognizing that it was wrong to worry and be concerned with his loss of title.
John Owens H3
ReplyDeleteLHP
Q1: When Augustine was younger, he solved the evil problem by subscribing to the Manichaean philosophy which said that God wasn’t all powerful and was in a constant battle of good an evil with the Devil. This allowed him to rationalize the thought of a good god allowing evil to exist in his world. However, after his conversion he instead had to rationalize this problem by believing that God's gift of free will was being corrupted by humans in order to be used for evil, which allowed him to maintain that God was all good and all powerful and say that evil was just a necessary by product of Gods gifts and humanities failings. I would assume it was not initially a major problem for him when he was young because he had not yet cemented his belief in traditional Christianity yet, which made it easier for him to believe different version of the problem.
Q2: He did not mention that he was a Christian. I'm not sure if this was on purpose or not but it allowed for the God in his book to be interpreted in multiple different ways, either as a Christian God or philosophical God.
Q3: His “recollection of ideas” can be easily traced back to Plato and his belief that people never really learn anything new, were born into the world with all the knowledge we could have. But by thinking and asking questions we begin to remember that information.
H2
ReplyDeleteLHP 1: In Augustine’s younger days, he “solved” this problem of evil by believing that God actually wanted evil things to happen. While being Manichean, he believed that good and evil were always in a fight, but after converting to Christianity, he believed that evil things came from the free will of humans, not a battle between good and evil. It wasn’t a problem for him originally because the Maniacheans believed that God wasn’t powerful enough to control every single aspect of reality.
LHP 3: Boethius’ “recollection of ideas” can be traced back to Plato, because he believed learning is just recalling ideas that someone already knows. Philosophy stresses to Boethius that life is just a struggle to recall what we knew earlier.
LHP 4: Anselm held up the idea that we can prove that God exists because we are able to imagine him. Because we’re able to conceive him, it shows that it’s truly possible he exists in reality, whether as a timeless being or one that controls every action.
H02
ReplyDeleteLHP 6-8
1. Augustine solved the issue in his early days by believing in Manichaeism. Manichaeans believe God is not supremely powerful, and that there is a never-ending battle between good and evil, and good sometimes lost places to evil, but would eventually reclaim them. When he converted to Christianity, he explained it via the free will argument: Evil exists because of free will. If God were to stop us from doing evil all the time, we would not have free will. It originally was not a problem for him because he was a wild youth, but eventually, he grew out of it.
2. That he was an early Christian
3. Plato: he believed we already had these ideas, this knowledge, and that we are just jogging our memory when we learn.
4. That we have an idea of GOD, and since we have an idea of God, he must exist, as nothing imagined can be greater than God.
5. The perfect island: the argument goes that since you have an idea of a perfect island, it must surely exist.
6. The uncaused cause: Simply put, something without a cause led to the creation of existence.
H03
ReplyDelete1. How did Enlightenment values advance in America in the 19th century?
These values were spread rapidly through Modernizatation, the printing press and from the freedoms introduced by the American constitution and other similar documents
2. What fantasy about 1776 has been accepted as fact by Americans across the religious spectrum (and Ronald Reagan) ever since?
The story of a large Robed figure appearing mysteriously in front of the founders of America and gives them a speech on how they should sign the Declaration of Independence
3. How was religion in America, unlike Europe, non-binary?
Numerous sects and denominations of religion exploded in the U.S. likely due to the religious freedom while a lot of Europe was still stuck in there traditions of state religions or massive religious infrastructure from what used to be the dominant and only religion which absorbed or chewed up all other smaller religions and churches
4. How did Thomas Jefferson characterize America's religious differences in the north and the south?
he said in the north they superstitious, hypocritical, and fervent in their religious doctrines however in the south they are detached from their religion following only the religion of the heart
5. What happened in Cane Ridge, KY in 1801, and how did a Vanderbilt historian describe it?
A massive religious festival with dozens of preachers, the Vanderbilt historian described it as comparable to Woodstock and large raucous event plagued by anarchy
H02
ReplyDeleteLHP Questions:
1. Augustine's solution to the problem of evil:
Before his conversion: Augustine initially subscribed to the dualistic views of Manichaeism, which held that evil was a substance existing independently of good. This made evil less problematic for him, as it could be blamed on an opposing force to God.
After his conversion: Once he embraced Christianity, Augustine argued that evil is not a substance but rather the privation of good, a corruption of God's perfect creation. For him, evil came from the misuse of human free will rather than from any created substance. Thus, God remained perfectly good and omnipotent.
2. What Boethius did not mention about himself in The Consolation of Philosophy:
Boethius did not discuss the fact that he was imprisoned and awaiting execution for treason while writing The Consolation of Philosophy. Instead, the work is philosophical and focuses on broader issues of human suffering, the nature of fortune, and the pursuit of wisdom.
FL Questions:
1. How Enlightenment values advanced in America in the 19th century:
Enlightenment values such as reason, individual liberty, and the pursuit of progress became more entrenched in American political and cultural life during the 19th century. These values were championed by movements like abolitionism, women's rights, and the expansion of democratic participation. The separation of church and state was further solidified as a reflection of Enlightenment ideals.
2. The fantasy about 1776 accepted as fact by Americans:
Many Americans, across religious and political spectrums (including Ronald Reagan), have embraced the notion that the United States was founded as a "Christian nation" in 1776. This belief overlooks the secular nature of the Constitution and the fact that many of the Founding Fathers were influenced by Enlightenment principles rather than strictly religious dogma.
H#3
ReplyDeleteLHP
1- Augustine first grappled with the problem of evil when he was young and followed the Manichaeism doctrine. This doctrine portrayed two equal forces of good and evil (God and Satan) in a constant power struggle, with neither being able to defeat the other. After converting to Christianity, he reconciled this conflict with the idea of human free will. According to his reasoning, humans can choose to do 'good' or 'bad,' and their actions will have consequences.
4- Anselm proposed the ontological argument, which states that the very concept of God implies God's existence. This argument revolves around the idea that a God that exists is more significant than a God that only exists in the mind, making denying the existence of God self-contradictory. Anselm's argument is unique because it relies solely on reason and the definition of God rather than empirical evidence. This philosophical argument has been highly influential and widely debated throughout the history of philosophy.
5- Gaunilo criticized Anselm's argument for the existence of God by using the example of a perfect island. Anselm believed that the mere concept of God implies his existence. However, Gaunilo illustrates the flaw in this reasoning using the perfect island example. It would be considered ridiculous to claim that a perfect island must exist just because someone can imagine it. Merely imagining something does not make it real. Anselm defended his argument by stating that it only applies to God because "he is the most perfect of everything."
H02 Erick Martínez
ReplyDeleteLHP:
1. In his earlier days he believed in manichaean, that there is this never ending battle between light and dark. That god wasn’t all powerful and he continues to fight with Satan. While there be instances where light loses, the opposite would also be true. He later came to believe in the Free will defiance which meant that he believed got gave us all free will. Augustine thought that god has to be all powerful, so he believed that god gave us free will in order to not have us as puppets and allow us to navigate our own lives whether we sin, or praise him.
2. Boethius was an early Christian but does not mention this in his book, The Consolation of Philosophy. It’s never stated why Boetheius didn’t say he was Christian but we can argue that he had likely decided to lean more into philosophy in his book. Sure hi themes were defending his beliefs, but I would argue that he didn’t want to write a book defending his religion but to use psychology to express what he saw as the right religion.
Discussion question
• Are supernatural stories of faith, redemption, and salvation more comforting to you than the power of reason and evidence? Why or why not?
Supernatural stories are more comforting to me because of the possibilities. I think being able to tell a story in our world with ideas that could aren’t necessarily possible is so fascinating. While I do believe that such feeling is possible with stories with reason and evidence sadly these books take the imagination from readers that is an amazing part of supernatural stories.
H03
ReplyDeleteWhen Augustine was younger, he believed in the Manichaean philosophy which said that God was not all powerful and was battling the devil on good and evil. This made sense to him when corresponding to the thought of a god, who is supposed to be good, allowing evil to exist. Eventually he came to struggle with this idea because God's gift of free will was corrupted by mortals and doing evil things. He wondered how could an all good god be allowing evil in his world. When he was young it may not have been as big of a philosophical issue for hi yet since he wasn't totally christian.
2. He didn't mention that he was an early Christian
4. Anselm said that we have an idea of god and since we have this idea he must exist therefore nothing can be better god since we have already came up with the most powerful idea
Section: H03
ReplyDeleteLHP Q1: Augustine as a child believed in the Manichaean beliefs. The Manichaeans believed in God. Although, they did not think of him as all powerful. They thought of religion as a concept of good and evil. That they were always pitted against each other, in a constant never-ending battle. However, they believed that in the end goodness would always triumph in victory. He later rejected this teaching. He then converted to Christianity. Thus, he tussled with the idea of free-will. Since the idea of an all-powerful God is now a reality to him, he tossed the idea that God has the power to end suffering so why wouldn’t he? Ultimately, he concluded that if God was to interfere with affairs of his creation, free will would not be just that, free.
LHP Q2: Boethius wrote “The Consolation of Philosophy.” However, in this he fails to mention an important view, but he was about to die so we will let it slide. He fails to mention his view on the worldly endeavors verses his view on God and what will ultimately last. He claims that the things of this world are perishable. He regrets living for this world instead of acting like a sojourner that never belonged here to begin with. After death we will have nothing that came from this world so why would we focus on things of this world. We should focus on the unending happiness that comes from God and spread the news while we are passing through and not live for this world and fall into worldly endeavors.