Author Archives: jaco3621

Mugging and Moral action

By jaco3621 | April 17, 2012

The problem of pain and suffering as we were discussing today, I just wanted to recap and add some thoughts. We picked up with God allows gratuitous evil, evil that is not necessary. There is some purpose to it or there is no minimum. Skeptical theist is at odds with regular theists, because to theists [...]

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 2 Comments

Research Post: Middle Knowledge and Divine control

By jaco3621 | April 13, 2012

Basinger’s outlines the argument of a God with middle knowledge and supplements his examination of a God with MK with the concept of divine control. The argument is based on God’s omniscience. His knowledge is of what has been actual and what comes of that. He is said not to have knowledge of future states [...]

Posted in Philosophy of Religion, Research Post | 2 Comments

Rowe’s Fawn

By jaco3621 | April 11, 2012

In Jordan’s article, he outlines that skeptical theists need accept moral skepticism as well. Intense suffering of innocent beings are evidence of that. That a morally perfect being does not prevent this occurrence for whatever, whether it be the greater good or because evil would result anyways. The argument is concluded by God not existing. [...]

Posted in Philosophy of Religion, Second Graded Post | Leave a comment

Natural Evil and Choice of Destiny

By jaco3621 | March 30, 2012

Swinburne’s main argument centers around moral evils which are perpetrated by human agents and naturals evils where human agents are not responsible for, like natural disasters. Moral evil he outlines is caused by human negligence or ignorance to the consequences of actions taken. These include incidences where humans can only learn the full consequences with [...]

Posted in Philosophy of Religion | Tagged | Leave a comment

God doesn’t wear a name tag…

By jaco3621 | March 29, 2012

Fales makes an objection to mystical trance states being trustworthy because God does not appear as the same figure, but rather a bunch of figures representing God in a number of different religions. Fales makes this point after showing that M.E.’s can be explained through naturalistic causes. He lays out that through the example [...]

Posted in Philosophy of Religion | Leave a comment

Alston’s Religious belief and Religious experience

By jaco3621 | March 21, 2012

Alston’s Argument Religious belief and religious experience…
1. Religious or mystical experience can provide prima facie rational support for the beliefs about God.
2. If rebutters and underminers are weak or fail to provide doubt of the experience, then it is reasonable to believe in that experience
3. Given the above premises, religious experience justifies religious belief
Alston examines [...]

Posted in First Graded Post, Philosophy of Religion | Leave a comment

Cosmological Argument

By jaco3621 | February 15, 2012

If the point of the Cosmological Argument is to explain why physical things exist at all, then thinkers up to this point have spent a great deal of time examining the cause of the physical things and God in extension, and not why they exist. I would have thought one would examine what is the [...]

Posted in Philosophy of Religion | 2 Comments

Some thoughts on the Fine Tuning Argument

By jaco3621 | February 8, 2012

While reading “The Design Argument” I was thinking how one could use the fine tuning argument as a reason to promote conservationism and environmental awareness. The idea of irreducible complexity, if I understand it correctly, presents the laws of nature as like a circuit, one part dependent on the next and so on. If one [...]

Posted in Philosophy of Religion | 2 Comments

Philosophy of Religion: Lacking a question

By jaco3621 | February 1, 2012

Mavrodes article on, “Some Puzzles Concerning omnipotence,” seems to come to the conclusion that by proposing “putative tasks that are self-contradictory,” to test God’s omnipotence are not effective way to answer the question if God is truely omnipotent. He concludes that they are out of the realm of possibility because the objects do not exist.   

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments