Author Archives: pisa6263

Brain in a Vat

By pisa6263 | April 14, 2012

The Brain in a Vat counter example against reliabilism claims that there are two ‘people’ (Brian and Brain), they are identical in their brain processes and thoughts. Brian exists in the real world, and Brain is a brain in a vat hooked up to a super computer. The argument claims
1) If reliabilism is true, then [...]

Posted in Second Graded Post, Theory of Knowledge | 1 Comment

The Best of all Possible Worlds

By pisa6263 | April 14, 2012

The best of all possible worlds objection to God’s existence claims that if there is a ooo-being, he would have both the desire (from omnibenevolence) and power (from omnipotence) to create the best of all possible worlds. However, this world is not the best of all possible worlds, as there are several instances we can [...]

Posted in Philosophy of Religion, Second Graded Post | 1 Comment

Van Inwagen and the No Minimum argument

By pisa6263 | April 9, 2012

In this argument, Jeff Jordan argues against Van Inwagen’s ‘No minimum’ argument, which states for any amount of evil n, there could be a lesser amount n-. I disagree with Jordan, and think that we can always think of a world which contains less evil, one less thief or murderer, or one less heart attack [...]

Posted in Philosophy of Religion | 1 Comment

The Counter Example of Gerald and the Blow to the Head

By pisa6263 | March 23, 2012

The Causal Theory claims that:
S knows P iff S’s belief P is caused by the fact that P.
The objection to this is
1)      If (c) then Gerald knows he had a blow to the head
2)      Gerald does not know that he took a blow to the head
3)      Therefore, not (c)
The counter example to the causal theory [...]

Posted in First Graded Post, Theory of Knowledge | 4 Comments

A Puzzle about Omniscience

By pisa6263 | March 23, 2012

I wish to discuss the problem of foreknowledge. The argument goes:
1)      Omniscience requires foreknowledge
2)      If God has foreknowledge humans have no free will
3)      Humans do have free will
4)      Therefore, no omniscient being exists
Premise one rests on the fact that to be all knowing one must know all things, including facts that have yet to happen. [...]

Posted in First Graded Post, Philosophy of Religion | 1 Comment

The Problem of Foreknowledge

By pisa6263 | January 31, 2012

In today’s class we discussed that if God has foreknowledge it becomes hard to say that humans have free will. Free will, however, is a large part of religious teachings. I believe that we can reject this by saying that omniscience does not require foreknowledge. If free will exists, than the future is not determined, [...]

Posted in Philosophy of Religion | 16 Comments