That being said anyone who is religious would feel uncomfortable while watching “Religulous”. The name to me was well thought out but offensive, “Religulous” a portmanteau or blend of the two words, religion and ridiculous. To me the movie should have actually been called “Christian Bashing Featuring Some Other Religions for Split Seconds” by Bill Maher. I wrote down many of his questionable quotes that are almost intelligent. Bill Maher is a smart individual but an agnostic can only promote what they know which means not very much when it comes to religion.
Socrates uses a rather elaborate argument to show this definition is also insufficient. If the gods approve of something because it is holy, their approval cannot be what makes it holy, he says. If an act is holy because the gods approve of it, we still do not know what makes it holy or why the gods approve. It seems that any attempt to define holiness by the will or approval of the gods is bound to fail. Even in contemporary society, we tend to associate morality with some kind of divine will, but through the Euthyphro, Socrates seems to suggesting we think along another line altogether.
In particular, when speaking of Spies, the lines are not as clear as they do not accept the tenets of Christianity but see activities such as prayer or forgiveness as useful to the secular world. Because of this area of debate, the idea of absolutes is not possible. Without absolutes, how can we actually give someone guidance on how and where to go in their lives? Without a spiritual path that is laid out and definite, where does someone with a troubled soul go? I am grateful for the door that the book opens by illustrating how the two worlds of psychology and Christianity can be married yet as in any marriage, there is always areas that are not
Which follows on from which? Do the Gods make piety, or fit in with it? Euthyphro states “Is what is pious loved by the Gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved?” Essentially what Euthyphro is saying is ‘Does God command what is good because it is good, or is the good “good” because commanded it?’ This dilemma leaves us with an argument based upon circular logic, and no matter how we seem to go about answering it we are left with the same predicament. We could side with the latter half of this
All things considered, the endeavor to question these arguments as a reason not to trust in God does not merit endeavoring. In the event that theists don't for the most part hold to these proofs as explanations behind faith, then why try attempting to question them to theists? Keeping on doing as such appears as though he is persuaded to demonstrate a point that few are not interested on questioning, and accordingly is intentionally attempting to set up theist conviction as crazy; at the end of the day, he is looking to start a fight. This is not a scholarly target article. Inclination essentially relinquishes scholarly objectivity.
“Religious Language is meaningless” Analyse and evaluate this claim with reference to the verification and falsification debates. (35 marks) Religious Language is language used to talk about God and other religious beliefs. Religious language is known to be cognitive as it can make a positive statement be proved true or false. However on the other hand, Religious language could be seen as non-cognitive as some statements could be misinterpreted, for example, majority rather than a minority in some cases could act out religious and cultural beliefs within society. The verification principle had originated from philosophers in a group called ‘The Vienna Circle” where they believed that dome statements were meaningful and some simply were not, they distinguished these statements by coming up with a theory called, The verification principle.
And how could this be, if the taste was something really inherent in the food?” (Berkeley, 16) Philonous validates the argument by providing indisputable reasons to support his statement. In doing this he concludes that it is simply impossible for sensible qualities in the taste of food to exist beyond what our mind makes and perceives of it. The main sources of validation of this argument are
Examine the important concepts of two critiques of the link between religion and morality. For some religious followers there is a link between religion and morality due to the guidelines set by religion for morality, for example the Ten Commandments. However it is important to discuss whether or not there is a clear link between the two, as otherwise perceptions on what is moral may differ, causing conflict within society. The Euthyphro Dilemma is a classic discussion of this argument which was started by Plato. He based his argument on the statement “Does God will something because it is good or is something good because it is willed by God?” There are two ‘horns’ to this argument which stem from the statement; these both critiques of the link between religion and morality.
McCloskey attempts to make an argument for the non-existence of God and to give reasons why atheism is more comforting than theism. This paper is a response to that article which will address certain ideas raised by Mr. McCloskey. This author is a theist and will present arguments to show the reasoning for the existence and necessity of God. To begin with, McCloskey suggests in his article that the theist’s arguments are “proofs” which do not provide definitive evidence for the existence of God, so therefore, they should be discarded. This is not a justified argument due to the fact that theists do not try to definitely prove the existence of God.
“The Enemies of Reason” “There are two ways of looking at the world, through faith and superstition, or through the rigors of logic, observation, and evidence through reason.” I believe this statement is true since there are those who believe things such as superstition and psychics can help you through life and there are those who base life off of hard evidence and facts. Richard Dawkins does not completely understand why people put faith in mediation and astrology. They are ways of having hope and a way to just relax because we are constantly stressed. People don’t have all the answers to life, so they turn to superstition and parapsychology to make decisions. We have done studies, such as the Wiseman study in Chapter 2, stating that psychics and everyday students have nearly the same results at predicting statements, yet people still pay to have their “minds read” or “predict the future.” It is fine to choose to believe in the irrational, but accepting money is another story.