Final Exam

3. Out of all three arguments for the existence only one of them is based on an a priori knowledge and it is the Ontological Argument. This argument is based on the knowledge that God does

Anselm argues in support of (4) by comparing a non-existent God with an existent God. An existent God, says Anselm, is greater than a non-existent God. If God were non-existent, therefore, then we could imagine a God greater than he, namely an existent God, (5) follows simply from (3) and (4).

1. Noelle quits her $80,000-a-year job to stay home. What is the opportunity cost of her decision?

1. Backers of the B-2 bomber have argued that it would be wasteful for Congress to stop their manufacture because so much has already been spent to develop the B-2. Advise Congress on how to deal with this argument.

b. “We may as well assert that because a child has thrived upon milk, that it is never to have meat, or that the first twenty years of our lives is to become a precedent for the next twenty.”

28.  When we respond to a stimulus as a Creator we are most likely to ____.

In his article “Evil and Omnipotence”, Mackie argues that many kinds of evil are not the result of God’s action, but of the choices made by human. As he says right after the fourth premise, “…why wholly good God gave men freewill although it would lead to some important evils” (p. 5). Even though Mackie has many things to say in Evil and Omnipotence, my paper will be focusing on the paragraph starting on p. 5 with “First I should query…”.

The central problem of this paper that I am going to try to convince my atheist friend is that god existed. I will argue in favor of a higher being by first presenting and evaluating two argument that will be used to persuade my atheist friend. First I will explain Pascal’s argument. Second I will explain one of the arguments of Aquinas’s that is in favor of the existence of god. Then I am going to explain what’s the central difference between the two arguments is. I will conclude by stating whether I was successful in converting my atheist friend.

In this essay, I shall analyse the problem of “Why didn’t a temporal God create the world sooner?”. This essay shall begin with an exposition of the problem as provided by Leftow, and then explain Leftow’s and Swinburne’s solutions. Furthermore, I shall explain the ineffectiveness of these solutions exposed by Craig, and I shall provide the view that the most effective solution to the problem is that God’s temporal mode of existence changes from timeless prior to creation, and temporal post-creation. However, firstly, we must understand the problem with which we are dealing.

a. I have solid, well-considered ethical beliefs that can be altered only by reasoned arguments or new evidence.

Whether we have free will is widely controversial. The absence of a universal definition poses a primary problem to this question. In this essay, I shall base my argument on a set of three conditions for free will: 1) that the actor is unconstraint in his action, 2) the actor could have acted otherwise and 3) the actor must be ‘ultimately responsible’ (Kane, 2005: 121) for his action. After I have explained them, I shall apply these conditions to three scenarios that cover most, if not any, circumstances that occur when taking choices. The purpose of this essay is to show that if my conditions are true, none of the scenarios is based on free will and thus we do not have free will.

b.”Upon my head they placed a fruitless crown and put a barren scepter in my grip”

We continue our study of the history of God by looking at His attributes from a number of different viewpoints. We will first examine the view of Classical Theism, then the view of Freewill Theism, and finally that of Open Theism. We begin by defining Classical Theism, also called traditional theism or Augustinian theism.

In this essay I will explain why I think the strongest position of the free will debate is that of the hard determinists and clarify the objection that moral responsibility goes out the door if we don’t have free will by addressing the two big misconceptions that are associated with determinists: first that determinism is an ethical system, and secondly that contrary to common belief determinists do believe in the concept of cause and effect. I will also begin by explaining my position and why I believe that the position of the indeterminist does not hold water as an argument and the third

The idea of omnipotence has been a tricky concept for philosophers for many years. Many philosophers have tried to define it without success. In this essay, I intend to look at, as the question poses, whether ‘A being is omnipotent if it has every power which it is logically possible to possess’ is an adequate definition of omnipotent and then move on to look at some other ways of defining omnipotence to see if they do any better.