Overall, I believe that Aquinas’ 3 ways are not very convincing as a proof of the existence of God. The different ways in which Aquinas try to prove the existence of God just make it either impossible for there not to be a God, which rejects any other ideas or, they make misleading assumptions that are not justified. My first reason for believing that Aquinas’ 3 ways are not very convincing is the 2nd way – from Cause. David Hume argues that you cannot see, hear or use any of your senses to see a cause. You cannot see a cause only two things happening in conjunction with one another.
“Since the mind is seen as a completely nonphysical entity, the mind (or soul) cannot be generated through the biological process of reproduction” (Hasker p. 67). This is what concerns both Data and Picard. That even if Data could be taken apart and put back together, the soul of Data would be lost. Picard is saying that Data is more than just an Android. Picard is in the belief that Data’s mind might be a program, but he is able to make decision on his own, making him an individual with a mind, and irreplaceable.
A model of a situation in which the skeptic’s perspective would be true for certain people, would be the world depicted in “The Matrix”. In class, the movie “The Matrix” was used as a modern example of a situation in which people’s beliefs, which they had derived from their own experience of the world (which was modeled after our world) were not knowledge, but in fact a computer simulation. If any one of us were to be dropped into the Matrix (if we’re not in it already), we would have no idea that anything would have changed—that nothing was real, that now none of our beliefs were knowledge. There are three main skeptical arguments as outlined by Michael Heumer in Reason and Responsibility: the “Infinite Regress Argument”, the “Problem of the Criterion”, and “How do I get Outside my Head?” In this paper, I will focus on explaining the infinite regress argument, and the foundationalist’s response to the skeptical argument. The skeptic’s infinite regress argument is built on the premise that in order for one to claim that any of their beliefs are knowledge, they need
William Paley developed these ideas with his version of the watch maker analogy. He argued that in the same way a watch's complexity implies the existence of its maker, so too one may infer the Creator of the universe exists, given the evident complexity of Nature. This argument resonates with a notion of the fine-tuned Universe, understood as an alternative to the anthropic principle. There have been numerous criticisms of the different versions of the teleological argument. Commonly, critics argue that any implied designer need not have the qualities commonly attributed to the God of classical theism.
In this work, Locke contradicts the theory of innate ideas and put forth the concept of the human mind as being a “tabula rasa” or blank slate where it is void of any ideas. Locke believed knowledge came from two sources: externally through the five senses and internally from functions of the mind such as perception, reflection, and doubting. Although both are important in the development of knowledge, the mind’s interactions between the two sources are the decisive
The Educated Imagination by Northrop Frye, as well as Eslinger’s “Ecology of Myth,” both examine the origins of knowledge and the role it plays in society. However, both texts, in addition to Timothy Findley’s Not Wanted on the Voyage, William Shakespeare’sHamlet, and the film Waking Life, can be used to prove that this quest for knowledge is useless. The pursuit of knowledge is futile, as there is no such thing as true knowledge. Attempts to attain something which does not exist results in the entering of an endless cycle of illusion. Here, individuals enter a constant state in which they try to convince themselves of what they believe to be truth and become ignorant.
This vagueness means that it can be used to explain almost any experimental results. | The capacity of the Central Executive has never been measured. | Physiological evidence exists using studies involving brain scans. PET scans have shown that different areas of the brain are used while undertaking verbal and visual tasks. These areas may correspond to components of WM.
I believe that even though he took off the piece of the mouse trap and used it for something else the primary function ceased to exist. It doesn’t support my initial hypothesis because the primary use is used for something completely unattended for. Going back and evaluating my initial hypothesis I still believe in the intelligent design theory. Intelligent design is where we as humans came from a higher power with all the proper parts to function. If you take away one of our parts like our brain or our heart will we have no function and our parts will have no function outside of our body.
He thinks that Aquinas had made an error in linking cause and effect – as have any other humans that have done the same. Cause and effect are two completely different things, linked incorrectly in the mind by induction. Hume argues that because of this error, there is no cause and effect chain and therefore, no first cause. He argues that we have no direct experience of the creation of the universe and so we cannot speak meaningfully about it. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) agrees with the idea that we cannot try to comprehend something outside of our reach – we can
Descartes: I shall explain. First of all, the mind can exist without the present of the body. The existence of my body is dubitable whereas my mind is not. Therefore my mind does not consist of the same properties of my body. This is a clear distinction that my mind is separate from my body.