In his letter, Galileo asserts the Bible as a direct authority on faith and not as of one on science when his states, “that our authors knew the truth but the Holy Spirit did not desire that men should learn things that are useful to no one for salvation" The idea that the Earth moved and the sun stood still did not contradict scripture. If the scripture was interpreted correctly then the sun could only stand still if the sun normally moved around the Earth. Galileo wanted people during the 18th century to open their minds to the scientific discoveries and realize that a new idea did not have to repute scriptures. He argued against the accusations the he was condemning the Bible in a way that was, "without understanding it, weighing it, or so much as reading it". Galileo claimed to strongly believe the Bible and its message of faith.
Evaluate Maurice Wiles views on miracles Maurice Wiles is a 20th century philosopher of religion. He has written many books including "The myth of god incarnate" and "gods action in the world". He took the same idea as David Hume in rejecting miracle, however took a very different approach to him. Maurice Wiles believed that Christian teaching has always interwoven with prophecy and miracle: God being incarnated in Christ. He said for Christians the universe and the nature of its workings was in itself a miracle from God.
In Einstein’s answer, Einstein clouds his own answer to the question, “Do scientists pray, and if so, what do they pray for?” by using scientific evidences and supporting both sides of the argument, therefore not stating a clear purpose (Einstein 10). Without stating a clear purpose, the audience cannot understand what the speaker intends to say, or his purpose. Einstein also does not create much Ethos, because he does not put himself at the same level as his audience. Einstein does have Logos, but he defends both sides of the argument, so one cannot take much of a side based on what he says. Finally, he has no Pathos, because he drones on like a robot, revealing no personal emotion whatsoever.
Albert Speer – Opinion Speech Albert Speer, architect of the third Reich, minister of Armaments, its undoubted that he was a man of great potential & caused great effect during Hitler’s reign & Germany’s ongoing war effort. Though one question still remains, that is, was he honest at the Nuremburg Trials in 1945? Was Speer really honest, when he said that he knew nothing of the holocaust & Nazi death camps? It was at the age of 26 in 1931, in an address to the students of Berlin University that Speer first saw Hitler. Speer admitted he was carried away by Hitler’s unmatched speaking prowess, unequivocal belief in Nazi ideology & the idea of a restored Germany.
Stacey Snyder Professor McMichael Introduction to Philosophy April 08, 2014 Paley’s Teleological Argument In this paper, I will be discussing Paley’s teleological argument for the existence of God. This is a valid argument but in my opinion it is not enough to prove the existence of God. I believe that even if all the premises are true and they relate to the conclusion, which they do, that the argument can still be proven wrong by other theories. Paley’s teleological arguments, also called the design argument, attempts to prove that God exists by proving that God created the earth and created humans. Paley’s version of the argument is commonly recognized by the “watchmaker” analogy which is as follows.
* Interpretive: facts are settled, but argue on what theory applies and so on * Evaluative: the significance * Methodological: procedures and techniques + what will be the outcome 6. At what point in his analysis does Casper identify scientific discourse that describes "science as it is actually performed?" - he is talking about the nobel prize lectures because they talk about the start, stop, and pitfalls differently than a research report does, it’s how science is actually performed 7. As a result of his analysis of Nobel lectures what characteristics does Casper attribute to epideictic scientific discourse? - little modulation or hedging (type of statements) - value of the research and the future (stasis) - recognition of other’s help/work/achievement - discussion on the nature of science itself 8.
Swinburne counted this by claiming that the order in the universe does require an explanation. As some is not even necessary for human survival. Just because we are there to observe it does not make it less unlikely. However Charles Darwin formulated the theory of natural selection which provided an alternative explanation for the design of the world, without reference to creation by God. ‘Natural selection, the blind, unconscious, automatic process which Darwin discovered, and which we now know is the explanation for this existence and apparently purposeful form of all life, has no purpose in mind’ Richard Dawkins supports Darwinian evolution and rejects God.
Darwin’s theory of evolution and natural selection gives us an alternative way to explain the complex functionality that leads to Paley thinking that a designer has left his mark on the universe. However, the anthropic principle helps prove God’s existence. The Big Bang theory has strengthened the case for God, as has the theory of evolution. In fact when we consider all the physical conditions that the universe had to possess for humans to evolve then there seems to be a conspiracy to fix the
This backs up his answer by him giving evidence to back up his claim. Albert Einstein’s final use of emotion in his answer is shown when he puts his own opinion in his answer by saying that scientist do have a sense of faith because they have to believe in something with the laws of nature which gives a feel of religion but he also states how different it is from the “religiosity of someone more naïve” he uses claims based on how he feels rather than rationale behind his claim, And it appeals to emotion. Albert Einstein not only just answers her question, but he uses ethos, logos, and pathos to make it more effective and understandable for Phyllis. He gives a reason to believe him and shows both sides of the claim. So in the end she can form her own opinion or argument about the whole thing.
Because this belief is the first step to Adorno’s idea of a fascist society, my argument will focus on positivism. Positivism is the belief in scientific objectivity. Our society seems to have adopted this philosophy and completely disregarded spiritual beliefs and art as expressions of Truth. Contradictory to what Adorno believes, I think that The Rite of Spring is important because it emphasizes spiritual roots. The dancers are celebrating the Earth and are willing to sacrifice everything for their beliefs.