Preview

John Searle Dualism

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
962 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
John Searle Dualism
1. Compare and contrast the views of John Searle and Rene Descartes on dualism.
John Searle and Rene Descartes both had opinions on dualism. John believe different aspects like mental and physical both are one substance. Rene, on the other hand, believes two different substances like mental and physical are different things. Rene even talked about how thoughts and feelings that are nonmaterial exists in material place.

2. Compare and contrast the views of George Berkeley and Thomas Hobbes on the mind.
George and Thomas believed that they both have the mind pretty much figured out. George thought the mindset and ideas came from the world around us and what is real. Thomas believes that there are no ideas, and that the mind itself just is motioned …show more content…
Existentlism is just freedom. Humans are not physical things but outside determinism too.
10. Explain, compare, and contrast the views of Anselm and Gaunilo regarding the Ontological argument.
Anselm and Gaunilo has had views on ontological. Anselm if we believe there are two objects that are identical one isn’t perfect and the other is. Gaunilo believes that Anselm’s theory is redundant because two words that sound the same aren’t for example, Sail and sale. The argument can work if everything is in …show more content…
Explain and evaluate the views of Freud and Nietzsche, on the rationality of religious belief.
Freud and Nietzsche doesn’t believe there is a god. Nietzsche once said “God is dead.” and he believed God never existed. Freud believed that religion is created for someone to believe they are protected.

12. Explain and evaluate the views of Tolstoy and Kierkegaard, on the rationality of religious belief.
Tolstoy and Kierkegaard believes that just because there is no rational explanation doesn’t mean that there isn’t a god. Kierkegaard believes the idea of God is beyond what we believe. Tolstoy believes that faith can provide answers.
13. Explain and evaluate Pascal’s Wager. Would belief based on such an argument get you into heaven?
There were four possible outcomes in Pascal’s Wager, and only want give the option to go to heaven, so if this is the only reason for someone to belief, will be really difficult to get there at some point. The rest of the option just sent you to held, or talked about the small energy that you saved or wasted believing in God.

14. Explain and evaluate William Paley’s version of the design
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Analysis Of Swindal's Incompatibilist Model
    • 268 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Analysis Of Swindal's Incompatibilist Model

    Swindal offers four models for the interaction of faith and reason. One of these models is particularly of interest here: the incompatibilist model. This model suggests, “…one can hold faith as transrational, inasmuch as it is higher than reason.” A second tier of this model is that faith can be irrational; hence, it is “not subject to rational evaluation at all” (Swindal, n.d., n.pag). The rationale behind having faith in God is that it binds together the common, or universal values and moral codes that are present in all cultures (Rachels, 1971, p. 621-22). Having said this, though, many who do have faith in God do not think that it requires any reasoning or any proof at all (Clark, n.d., n.pag.). In his discussion, though, Clark refers to…

    • 268 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    The Chosen Danny Saunders: An Analysis
    • 250 Words
    • 1 Page

    The Chosen Danny Saunders: An Analysis

    obvious conflict between the irreligious tenets of Freudianism (of which he is a great admirer) and his…

    • 250 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Pascal’s Wager vs. the Ontological Argument
    • 2458 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Pascal’s Wager vs. the Ontological Argument

    Pascal’s Wager was a groundbreaking theory posed by the French philosopher, mathematician, and physicist Blaise Pascal. Pascal, who is said to be the father of modern probability, felt that that religion should be approached as a gamble. It was one of the first efforts to incorporate the concept of infinity. The wager stated that, even though the existence of God cannot be determined through reason, one should wager as though God exists, because living accordingly, has essentially nothing to lose and experiences can only be beneficial. Pascal’s Wager consists of three arguments. The first is the argument from super dominance. Pascal wrote: “God is, or He is not. But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here. Which will you choose then? Let us see. Since you must choose, let us see which interests you least. Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is.” In this quote, Pascal is implying that there is a possibility God exists, if one assumes God exists and he indeed does, then one has gained everything, perhaps heaven. However, if God does not exist then one has lost nothing. The Bible would merely be a mistake and He would not exist, along with Heaven or the like. Regardless, it is best to take the gamble because there is nothing to lose, according to Pascal. Pascal’s next argument was the argument from expectation. He supported this argument when he wrote: “Let us see. Since there is an equal risk of gain and of loss, if you only had to gain two lives, instead of one, you might still wager. But if there were three lives to gain, you would have to play (since you are under the necessity of playing), and you would be imprudent, when you are forced to play, not to chance your life to gain three at a game where there is an equal risk of loss and gain. But there is an eternity of life and…

    • 2458 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Descartes Substance Dualism Theory
    • 616 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Descartes Substance Dualism Theory

    Based upon the belief that the mind and body are two separate entities, philosophers, such as Rene Descartes, support the Substance Dualism theory of mind, arguing that the mind, which is a thinking entity, may exist without the body, which is a physical extension, because it is its own individual substance of matter. In Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy, he puts all concepts of previous certainty into question, intentionally leaving the reader with skepticism towards the concept of knowledge and mental capacity at large. Further, he continues to contend that the mind is distinctly different than the body and can be innovated due to its ability to think, whereas the body is merely a tangible and measureable dimension with no greater abilities, such as thinking or experiencing emotion. Additionally, Descartes further describes the ideas held by Substance Dualists through detailing that under this theory of mind, all entities are…

    • 616 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Pascal's Wager Rhetorical Analysis
    • 1565 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Pascal's Wager Rhetorical Analysis

    Though, if God does not exist, theists will enjoy fixed happiness, while atheists will too enjoy fixed happiness. In this situation too theists will still in a way have it better because of the comforts of religion. Religion brings it followers a sense of belonging, comfort, happiness, and brings people together. With religion though, one is restricted in certain activities that an atheist could partake in. With atheism or agnosticism you aren’t rewarded in a sense with these benefits that religion brings. Pascal basically says that it is wrong to be an atheist as there is not possible chance to win the prize in the end. Therefore it is rational to believe in…

    • 1565 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Freud and Tillich
    • 1122 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Freud and Tillich

    Now the gods have been replaced by science and a singular God (a father), who became more sophisticated than his predecessors, promising compensation for all the hard aches. Freud claims, that religion isn’t the essence of morality, that society didn’t adapt to the Ten Commandments but the…

    • 1122 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Pascal's Wager: Epistemic Argument For God
    • 1959 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Pascal's Wager: Epistemic Argument For God

    Pascal’s Wager does not provide has some challenges in its reasoning and is not a convincing argument for one to believe in God, but it can be applicable to a catered category of people. Pascal’s Wagers main issue is that it is not an epistemic argument. Before just dismissing Pascal’s Wager as not an epistemic argument, one must understand what an epistemic argument is. An epistemic argument is an argument that must be rational, reasonable and justified in order to be believed. For instance, if one believes in God because one experienced a miracle and then claims the miracle experienced, like an apple falling from a tree into one’s hand is a sign from God, one’s argument pointing to the miracle as evidence is not applying an epistemic argument.…

    • 1959 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Pascal s Wager
    • 1065 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Pascal s Wager

    Pascal’s Wager is that of whether or not to believe in God. What are the benefits? What are the consequences? I will argue that Pascal’s Wager is indeed persuasive to believing in God due to the appeal of one’s emotions and desires. One may object that Pascal is not thoroughly persuasive regarding that the belief in God’s existence is greater than not believing, but I will continue to argue that it is, and it can only offer the better reward.…

    • 1065 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Response To Anselm's Ontological Argument
    • 1034 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Response To Anselm's Ontological Argument

    In the “Proslogion” Anselm argues God as the greatest conceivable being that exists in reality. In this essay, I will show that Anselm’s ontological argument is sound and his conclusion logically follows from his premises. I will consider an objection towards Anselm’s definition of God and show that it is unconvincing and flawed. The objection against Anselm’s ontological argument that I will consider will be one brought up by a contemporary of Anselm, Gauinilo.…

    • 1034 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Pascals Wager
    • 638 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Pascals Wager

    Pascals Wager assumes that God, All powerful knowing and good as he is, cannot tell whether your faith is based on true belief or because you are backing into a corner by Pascals logic. Pascal created this wager in order to try and make an argument for faith in God. But the definitive nature of the argument makes it inevitable that some people will only have belief because their is no logical reason not to. This fact hurts pascals point because if God knows all he would certainly be aware of the falsehood of these peoples faith and still not allow them into “heaven”. This is plausible because God as most Religious people see him would not reward self interest.…

    • 638 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Does ‘Pascal’s Wager’ Provide a Convincing Argument for Belief in God?
    • 823 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Does ‘Pascal’s Wager’ Provide a Convincing Argument for Belief in God?

    Many people’s beliefs may be in their own interest to hold, thinking, if we plan for the future it will pay off in the long run; or in other cases, we explain why somebody holds a belief by appealing to its causes. This being said, the idea of the Wager is deciding whether or not to believe in God and to consider the expected outcome for each of these options. I think that Pascal’s Wager is supposedly meant to provide reasons which would persuade any rational person that they should believe in God. However, I don’t think it is a valid argument, although it is convincing. The argument of Pascal’s Wager can be used for any God at all, so what happens if you pick the wrong God? Who is to say this God actually rewards belief and punishes those who do not believe? If we supposedly were to pick a god and it does exist, won’t this omniscient god know that we only believe just to be safe? Would our outcome still be an infinite reward, or would we not be rewarded for our fake belief? I don’t think we can be guaranteed any specific outcome, such as an infinite reward or infinite punishment, because if you believed in a god because you wanted to have chance on your side, then the God would know this, and would know that your belief was not real.…

    • 823 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Pascal Wager's Argument
    • 395 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Pascal Wager's Argument

    The existence of God has always been a commonly asked question in the world today. Since there is no scientifically proven answer, arguments have been accumulated over time. One being the Pascal Wager’s argument. This theory states that either God exists or God does not exist, you can either wager for God or wager against God. This belief advocates the belief in God rather than providing evidence. Does Pascal's Wager commit the fallacy of appealing to consequences?…

    • 395 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Pascal's Wager vs. Descartes' Meditations
    • 1592 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Pascal's Wager vs. Descartes' Meditations

    Pascal focuses on the question: Should one believe in God? He takes the basic variables and puts them together and weighs the outcomes. The variables are A: God exists, and B: God does not exist. The other two variables are X: Believe in God and Y: Do not believe in God. When variables A and X are put together, i.e., if God exists and you believe in God, this is an infinitely good thing because if one believes in God, he will go to heaven. Next, consider variables B and X i.e., God does not exist but one believes in God. This is viewed as a status quo because nothing is gained or lost by worshiping nothing. This set of circumstances is given the value of zero. Next, variables A and Y are taken into account. If God truly does exist and one does not believe in him, this is an infinitely bad thing, because eternal damnation is viewed as a negative. Thus, this set of circumstances is given a negative value. The final two variables to be weighed against each other are B and Y. If God does not exist, and one does not believe in him, again the value will be zero because nothing is gained or lost in this example.…

    • 1592 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Will to Believe
    • 897 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Will to Believe

    In the second portion of James’ essay, James brings up differences in how a person renders a hypothesis due to “the actual psychology of human opinion.” He implicates that we usually use our own “passional and volitional nature” to make our judgment or belief. However, a valid hypothesis for one person may not be equally valid in the eyes of another. Hence, James argues that our belief is composed of relation of ideas that we can see and cannot see. If the idea does not exist, we cannot assume that it is given based on our belief. To illustrate his point, James gives an example of Pascal’s wager, which conveys that we have a choice to either believe in God or to disbelieve in God. According to Pascal’s wager, if we choose to believe in God, we will be blessed eternally. In contrast, if we choose not to believe in God, we will lose. James, therefore, states that this example is not a living option. In other words, the hypothesis that Pascal has offered to us is…

    • 897 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Pascal's Argument For God
    • 581 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Pascal's Argument For God

    Pascal says “If there is a God, He is infinitely incomprehensible, since, having neither parts nor limits, He has no affinity to us’’ (Pascal, 2). Throughout Pascal’s argument he makes the constant notion believing in order to gain finite happiness, how is it possible to know if God is willing to provide this infinite gain if he is infinitely incomprehensible? This critical mistake is the very reason Pascal’s argument doesn’t work, we just don’t have the knowledge to know about what truly happens after death. Pascal makes his argument for God by noting “you must wager. It is not optional” (Pascal, 3). In which one has the choice of believing in God or not to believe in God, whether we want to risk the chances of infinite happiness or to rot…

    • 581 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More

Related Topics