Lesson 4 - Descartes and Modern Version

Slide 1

Descartes and Modern VersionsDO NOW:21/09/2014

Bonjour! Philoso-fams!.

Cogeto ergo sum

I think, therefore, I am.

What does this mean? What am I arguing? Relate to Ontology?DQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, Enquirer

1

By the end of this lesson you will:Know: The key features of Descartes, Malcolms and Platingas Ontological Arguments.Be able to: Explain these using demonstrations and examples and evaluate them for their strengths and weaknesses.So that: We can create our own individual notes and full mark answers to an exam style question.DQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, Enquirer

2

ConnectionDescartes Two Analogies (CARTESIAN thinking)

DQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, EnquirerExistence can no more be separated from the essence of God than can its having three angles equal to two right angles be separated from the essence of a triangle, or the idea of a mountain from the valley. (Descartes in MEDITATIONS).Read/Discuss/Summarise Whats he arguing about God and existence generally?

EXTENSION: Critiques!HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, EnquirerActivationDescartes Overall Argument A02 or A01?DQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?P1 - God has all perfections (OMNI.)P2 - Existence is a perfection (I think therefore) C = Therefore, God exists.

Existence is an essential quality of a supremely perfect being, just like a triangle has to have 3 angles, or a hill needs a valley.God is the perfect being.This is very simplifiedRead through the sheetIdentify the key informationCreate a flow diagram.HINT: Simples!

What are you not sure about or do not understand about what we have covered so far this lesson?Stuck in the Mud!AFLWrite this as a question on a post-it note and stick it on the wall.Easy? Formulate a tricky question to test the teacher!

ConnectionModern Version 1: Norman Malcolm (20th Century)DQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, Enquirer

Howdy pardners I agree with Kant that existence is not a PREDICATE. It is not something which can be affirmed or denied concerning an argument within a proposition. God exists. is not predicate therefore.

Moreover do the following things exist? Will they ever exist? Will they ever STOP existing? Discuss!

GODMr Ts LunchThis his how I do it:God does not exist so cannot come into existence.God exists contingently so cannot cease to exist if perfect.God exists necessarily so if exists at all He is eternal and necessary.God exists (?)

ActivationMalcolm's Version in Correct Proof FormulaHOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, EnquirerDQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?

Read/discuss the proof formula to decode and contextualise it.What does this proof formula prove? Sure about this?Where and how can it be criticised?Can things that dont currently exist possibly exist? Which premise does this attack?Is necessity a perfection? How can we tell? Is Gods existence the same as other forms of existence? It the argument valid?HINT: Work step by step, premise by premise making sure to break it down.EXTENSION: Decode and contextualise the quote underneath his proof formula. Answer the questions above using this rather than the proof formula.

A01 or A02?

What are you not sure about or do not understand about what we have covered so far this lesson?Stuck in the Mud!AFLWrite this as a question on a post-it note and stick it on the wall.Easy? Formulate a tricky question to test the teacher!

Lets have a demonstration!SUM THIS IDEA UP!ConnectionModern Version 2: Alvin PlatingaDQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, Enquirer

My version of the argument uses something called MODAL LOGIC. This means employing the idea or concept of possible worlds. By considering not just what exists or occurs in the world we have, but also what could exist or could occur in a possible world out of an infinite number of possibilities we can try to make sense of what is self-contradictory, possible or necessary in the real world. (Nature of Necessity)

ConnectionWhat are the IMPLICATIONS for if this happened?

Nazis win WWIIDQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, Enquirer

Aliens are discovered

Activation(Modal Logic) Or in other words

Modern Version Critiques: A02DQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, Enquirer

Activation

Wont convince an atheist. Reducing the argument to saying if you believe, He exists.God is only POSSIBLE in all worlds NOT actual in all worlds Does God exist?Necessary existence is not a coherent concept You either exist or you dont.If there is a being of maximal greatness can there also not be a being of maximal evil?A being of NO MAXIMILITY is also possible that this exists the logic is a fallacy.NormNormAlvAlvAlvWhich critique belongs to which philosophers argument? How and where do they link to ours?

Modern Version 2: Alvin PlatingaDQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, Enquirer

Activation1) A being of MAXIMAL GREATNESS God is maximally great and maximally excellent fitting Descartes and Anselms definitions.2) Such a being would have to exist necessarily to fit the definition and can exist independently as apposed to a contingent being.3) This beings existence in a possible world is either necessary or impossible those are the only two choices.4) The maximally great beings existence is only impossible if it is self-contradictory and that it makes it illogical and incoherent as a concept must ACTUALLY exist in all worlds.Read/Discuss/Summarise Evaluate why this is strong or problematic?5) The maximally great beings existence is not impossible in an infinite number of possible worlds, and therefore it is PROBABLY necessary in all worlds including this one.A01 or A02?

What are you not sure about or do not understand about what we have covered so far this lesson?Stuck in the Mud!AFLWrite this as a question on a post-it note and stick it on the wall.Easy? Formulate a tricky question to test the teacher!

And finally Dawkins is back bitches!Connection

Let me translate this infantile argument into the appropriate language for you:

PERSON 1 - Bet you I can prove God exists.PERSON 2 - Bet you cant.PERSON 1 -Right then, imagine the most perfect, perfect thing possible.PERSON 2 - Okay, now what?PERSON 1 -Now, is that perfect perfect thing real? Does it exist?PERSON 2 No, its only in my mind.PERSON 1 -But if it were real It would be even more perfect because a really really perfect thing would have to be better than a silly old imaginary thing. So Ive proved that God exists. Nur nurny nur nur. All atheist are fools!DQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, Enquirer

Evaluating the Argument Further in A02DQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, EnquirerActivationThere are further strengths and weaknesses to the argument.Decode and contextualise the information on the sheet.Highlight key information as necessary.Add the information that you find into the table to show if it is a STRENGTH or a WEAKNESS.Ensure that you state which version or philosopher that it is specifically criticising or whom states it.DO THIS IN SILENCE FIRST OF ALL!Anti-RealismLanguage GamesDeductive ReasoningHINT: You could use the reader/ILT alongside this to help you.

EXTESNION: Once complete order these strengths and weaknesses from 1-6 to show most to least convincing arguments.

What are you not sure about or do not understand about what we have covered so far this lesson?Stuck in the Mud!AFLWrite this as a question on a post-it note and stick it on the wall.Easy? Formulate a tricky question to test the teacher!

DemonstrationPEEL/C IT! Write the introductionBronze ChallengeUse peel/c structure to write the opening paragraph(s) to answer the question.Remember to BUG the question to establish what its asking you for and to use these words in your answers.Think about what the examiner is going to highlight just as when you peer-assess.Silver ChallengeInclude keywords and knowledge from AS briefly to strengthen your points A posteriori?Include some facts or information from your ILT notes or research projects.Get it peer-assessed using an RPoP.Gold ChallengeDo all of silver challenge.What could you include from AS to make your arguments stronger? Keywords/Quotes/Concepts?HOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, EnquirerDQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?II) Discuss the claim that these distinctive features constitute the main weakness of this argument for proving the existence of God. (12)Examine the distinctive features of the Ontological argument. (18)

Three contestants come to the front of the class.

A volunteer to be the timekeeper.

The contestants must sum up everything in todays lesson and keep talking for 60 seconds.

The contestant must not repeat what they have already said.

The winner is the contestant who speaks for longest and recalls the most facts.

The audience must help keep score!

The Usain Bolt Challenge

ConsolidationHOM: Contextualiser, Evaluator, Decoder, Connector, EnquirerDQ: Is God-Talk Worthless?

19

ILT Essay in full Part I and II For FridayUse questions from the lesson Use your notes from the reader to add additional detail to get the top marks.