The issues with this option mainly deal with the definition of a theistic God. If morality is independent of God and God’s commands only exist because the moralities of actions are predetermined, then God is no longer sovereign. If morals are independent of God’s commands then God is not sovereign over morality. This goes against the definition of a theistic God which defines God as the creator and ruler over everything. It also puts limits on God’s power.
I disagree that Hume's arguments to causation are successful to a full extent due to the fact that Hume's challenges criticise causation from the point of view that empirical evidence is our only source of knowledge, suggesting we cannot know whether the effect due to cause can be discovered because "the effect is different from the cause, and so can never be discovered." Yet why should we apply the limitations of our ability to state that God does not exist? To further evaluate, Hume states we are bound by empirical data and so we will only be able to 'induce' that the regress of cause and effect exists and so this regress falls foul to Hume's Fork. The criticism of Hume's challenge is formulated in the sense that because philosophically and empirically "we will never know the true origins of the universe" it does not mean that "the universe is the "brute fact" as stated by B. Russell. A second challenge of Hume is that we are able to possibly imagine that something can cause itself into existence.
Hence, our conception of one substance would be understood via an external property in relation with the other substance. Since substances cannot be understood in terms of external properties in relation with each other then they cannot be said to account for one another either because they do not relate to each other. Hence, since they cannot account for another, then they cannot cause or produce one another. From this line of reasoning Spinoza provides the corollary that substance cannot be produced by anything outside of it because there only exist substance and their
It does not prove God’s existence; it argues that there must be a necessary being which created the universe. This is consistent with some views of God, however, it is far from an all-encompassing explanation. The argument is not considered to be the end-all-be-all defense for the existence of God. However, it is a good
Socrates constantly reiterated that divine law must supersede the laws created by state in the Apology, an argument he completely contradicted in Crito, where he emphasized on the importance of respect of institution and one’s civic obligation. A functioning government and society would not be feasible if there is an absence of clearly defined laws. Legitimate nation-states have constitutions, sets of rules that their constituency must respect and obey to establish a social order. It also serves as a binding social contract or an agreement between the government and its subordinate
Free will means that God does not have any set destiny for us. If God were to create free agents that could only choose good, that would mean that God laid out a destiny of good for all agents. Even though God is omniscient, free will is still possible because while God may know the choices we are going to make, he is not the cause of them. Since God does not choose or cause our destiny, we still have free will. In response to the option in which God creates a world with free agents and no evil, a world with no evil would mean a world with no good, so it would be impossible for God to create a free agents that only choose good, since evil does not exist.
It will also discuss how this concept is incorporated into the U.S. Constitution and explain its importance in the American government and policy. To better comprehend the concept of majority rule and minority rights we need to examine the meanings of each. The concept of majority rule is defined as a set of guidelines by which the larger mass of an organized group (majority) has authority to make choices and decisions that are mandatory on all in the group; meaning that the guidelines will be determined by what the majority of what the people decide. (Greensburg & Page, 2007).While this majority has the upper hand in law making, the constitution was set up to ensure that the rights of minorities be protected despite of race, sex, religious belief or sexual preference. The next concept- minority rights are the essential rights ascribed to particular minority groups to guarantee that they receive and maintain equal opportunities and fairness.
He argued that they were part of the structure of the mind and that we would have no experience without them. He says that sight, smell, touch etc. are all meaningless to us unless they are brought under these innate concepts. Kant believes in a world beyond our conceptual scheme called the noumenal world which he says we can know nothing about and it is impossible to discuss. People have criticized this view by say that how can Kant know that the Noumenal world exists if there is no evidence of it.
Examine the process of legitimation and exercise of authority in local power structures? Power, authority and legitimacy are more or less used as synonyms in the present societal context. A person or group withholding power is unquestionably regarded as propounders of legitimate authority. Exploring the concepts of power, authority and legitimacy becomes important as it forms an integral part of our society for a simple reason that these are the defining features of a social being with social and political institutions and hierarchies. In this essay I try to explore the evolution of power into one that is legitimate and widely accepted.
Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of an unwritten constitution. What is a constitution? Finer, a great philosopher defined that "codes of rules which aspire to regulate the allocation of functions, powers and duties among the various agencies and officers of government and define the relationships between them and the public." In my understandings, what finer had tried to explain was the social contract between government and society. Social contract may be is a form of constitution that obey by citizen and enforced by government.