Pathos is the first appeal used in the second part of the letter. Einstein is trying to please Phylis by telling her that he is not perfect, so there can very well be a God and answered prayers. Ethos is next, Einstein says that “Nature also rests on a sort of faith…”. Einstein is a Nobel Prize winning scientist and he is telling her facts that have been studied and proven, making this statement ethos. The appeal of logos is not present in this paragraph.
But here I would like to put in my own opinion much like McCloskey has throughout his article. I feel that McCloskey is correct in the fact that we as theists do believe in some of these what he likes to call "proofs" that he has states as being irrelevant is false in my opinion. I would like to put my own “proof” to this matter based on something I have heard from Albert Einstein who was a great scientist, he once stated that there really is no such thing as evil, evil is just an absence of good. He states that when asked the question what is darkness what do we
This distinction also helps us look into our own minds, to better analyze our thoughts and beliefs when it comes to religion. Learning the distinction between ‘Natural Religion’ and ‘Biblical Faith’ will help with analyzing both past arguments we have learned, and arguments that have yet to come. In Herberg’s esteemed writing, “Biblical Faith and Natural Religion” he begins the paper with an introduction to some of Jules Masserman’s ideas. In presenting Masserman’s ideas of “The Ur-Defenses of Man” [Herberg 175], Herberg is able to set up a basis for his argument. Masserman at heart agrees with Freud’s argument that religion is an illusion humans hold onto, but he makes a key distinction in saying that this illusion is necessary for the well doing of human beings, “they are substitutive or compensatory beliefs, quite necessary to make human life at all livable” [Herberg 177].
Does God Exist? Descartes’ Argument and Proofs Rene Descartes considers what he can be sure to be true in his Meditations on First Philosophy. His meditations cover a vast variety of areas: the nature of the mind and body, the senses, the essence and existence of material things; but of all of these topics, one of his most thought-provoking and fascinating meditations is that on the existence of God. His argument is fairly well stated, but it is not flawless in its reasoning and logic. Through explanation and analysis of his position, this paper will set out his belief on the existence of God, the importance of this argument to his overall position, and to discuss several of the problems in his reasoning.
It’s important to address this danger, and although faith can certainly create the benefits described in How God Changes Your Brain, it’s irresponsible to ignore that faith, being a psychological tool, can be used for both positive and negative means. A good part of How God Changes Your Brain is the author’s respect for people who do not share their beliefs. The book is more an explanation for why people like religion, rather than an argument for religion’s existence. Changes Your Brain doesn’t use literary prowess to emphasize a strong tone, but rather keeps a level and clear voice throughout the book, it has the opposite the tone of a preacher. I wish that the book addressed why some people firmly reject or accept faith, on a psychological basis.
They treated claims made about God as cognitive, meaning that the assertions made are meant to be taken as facts or universal truth claims rather than non-cognitive meaning on a personal level for believers. They believed that language was only meaningful if it was analytically or synthetically verified. Analytic statements are a priori (based on logic) and synthetic statements are a posteriori (based on empirical evidence). They created a test called verification principle to see if religious language was meaningful; Statements can only be meaningful if it can be demonstrated. One could argue that the logical positivists were unsuccessful in arguing that religious language is meaningless because the verification principle has many weaknesses.
Assess the view that science has replaced religion as the main ideology today Ideology is a set of ideas that legitimates the power of a particular group. Science explains the world with testable evidence and that evidence would legitimate the power of that group. As opposed to religion which is a shared set of views and looks up to a supernatural being and having answers for the creation of the world regarding these supernatural deities, and these answers would legitimate the power of a follower of that religion. Throughout the course of history, religion has played a huge part in terms of followers and people’s views of how the world is created. Mainly Christianity in pre industrial Britain and also after.
He is half correct in his statement as a theist does not believe in the proofs individually, but finds enough evidence in them to form the belief that God does exist; He is the creator of the universe, and He is morally perfect. McCloskey touches on faith in his article. It is defined by Tillich: as the state of being ultimately concerned as claiming truth for concern, and is involving commitment, courage, and the taking of risk. Theists have faith in God, and treat Him as the most important person in their lives. To have faith in someone on past knowledge, according to McCloskey, is reasonable however; it is unreasonable to have faith in God as we have no past knowledge of God.
He talks about our consciences, both authoritarian and humanistic. He even goes into detail about why it’s better to Garra 2 obey out of love then out of fear. Erich also states that “For centuries, obedience was insisted as a virtue, and disobedience was insisted as a vice.”(Fromm 683). This statement implies that obeying was the right thing to do, and disobeying was the wrong thing to do. He even uses religion and terms that deal with religion throughout his article for more evidence.
Philosophers both past and present have sought a solid bases for morality. A strong influence on peoples perceived morality is religion. Divine Command theory is the belief that somehow your morals are dependent upon God. This theory has come under immense scrutiny due to a deeper understanding of natural selection, one sentence in Plato’s dialogue ‘Euthyphro’ and a study showing the polar opposite of what the theory would have you believe. Several books, including Robert Hinde’s Why Good is Good, have argued that our sense of right and wrong is derived from a Darwinian origin.