Summary Of Evolution And The Modern Dues Ex Machina By Margaret Betz
Evolution and The Modern Dues Ex Machina’ Margret Betz argument can be summarised as:
C- “Recognising a scientific theory like evolution makes holding basic Christian principles impossible”.
However Betz focuses on a specific scientific theory in order to prove this. She offers first specific justification for the view that Christians can not hold simultaneous beliefs in both the immortality of the human soul and the theory of evolution of species. As she puts it:
“I would argue that no Christian can simultaneously maintain belief in the evolution of the species and the basic christian principle of the immortality of the human soul”
I will explain how Betz reaches this conclusion. The first premise but forward to support this view is: …show more content…
2.Why intervene with this particular species at some ‘sufficiently human point’?
3.What made that life form so superior to the life form that came before it to warrant being granted an immortal life?
4.Why not grant all life immortal souls?”
Betz compares the belief expressed within P1 to the plot device deus ex machina often used in Greek tragedies in which an inextricable problem is solved by the intervention of some divine character. The lack of rational counters to the challenges posed leads Betz to claim that the “distinctly human immortal soul is the quintessential example of dues ex machina".
The second premise put forward by Betz can be summarised as so:
P2 - The immortal soul is a primary, essential belief within christianity and is “arguably the foundation of the christian message”. Disregarding it would be renouncing ones faith in Christianity.
Betz argues that Christians who hold the views contained in P2 “bring it upon themselves” to explain how these views are compatible with their belief in an immortal soul. Betz argues that because of connection made in P2 that no Christian can reasonably have belief in evolution theory and the immortality of the human soul …show more content…
In ‘Death’ Thomas Nagel’s argument can be summarised as:
C- Death is an evil if there is no limit to the amount of life it is good to experience.
Nagel builds a case for the common view that death is an evil, however it is important to note his argument is conditional on the question of wether there is a point at which life is no longer good to experience.
The major premise of Nagel’s can be summaries as:
P1- Death deprives us of experiencing further good in life.
Nagel makes it very clear that death itself does not hold inherently positive features which make it bad. For one can not experience the state of
C- “Recognising a scientific theory like evolution makes holding basic Christian principles impossible”.
However Betz focuses on a specific scientific theory in order to prove this. She offers first specific justification for the view that Christians can not hold simultaneous beliefs in both the immortality of the human soul and the theory of evolution of species. As she puts it:
“I would argue that no Christian can simultaneously maintain belief in the evolution of the species and the basic christian principle of the immortality of the human soul”
I will explain how Betz reaches this conclusion. The first premise but forward to support this view is: …show more content…
2.Why intervene with this particular species at some ‘sufficiently human point’?
3.What made that life form so superior to the life form that came before it to warrant being granted an immortal life?
4.Why not grant all life immortal souls?”
Betz compares the belief expressed within P1 to the plot device deus ex machina often used in Greek tragedies in which an inextricable problem is solved by the intervention of some divine character. The lack of rational counters to the challenges posed leads Betz to claim that the “distinctly human immortal soul is the quintessential example of dues ex machina".
The second premise put forward by Betz can be summarised as so:
P2 - The immortal soul is a primary, essential belief within christianity and is “arguably the foundation of the christian message”. Disregarding it would be renouncing ones faith in Christianity.
Betz argues that Christians who hold the views contained in P2 “bring it upon themselves” to explain how these views are compatible with their belief in an immortal soul. Betz argues that because of connection made in P2 that no Christian can reasonably have belief in evolution theory and the immortality of the human soul …show more content…
In ‘Death’ Thomas Nagel’s argument can be summarised as:
C- Death is an evil if there is no limit to the amount of life it is good to experience.
Nagel builds a case for the common view that death is an evil, however it is important to note his argument is conditional on the question of wether there is a point at which life is no longer good to experience.
The major premise of Nagel’s can be summaries as:
P1- Death deprives us of experiencing further good in life.
Nagel makes it very clear that death itself does not hold inherently positive features which make it bad. For one can not experience the state of