For example, on Damascus Road, Saint Paul’s religious experience transformed his moral outlook. It would appear that all religious experiences demonstrate a revelation of truth, but one could argue that this does not indicate they are true. As Freud would argue that religious experiences are a way of externalising deep, repressed personal truths. In such a view, religious experiences are unverifiable and cannot be thought to prove the existence of God, as they are merely manifestations of the human subconsciousness. A transient experience short, and cannot be sustained for a long duration of time.
If gun violence was on the rise should we raise the price of guns or promote gun safety and proper use? Obviously, promote gun safety and proper use. If you try to raise prices to fix something people will still get a hold of it. Junk food will forever and always be in the world but if the government is to do anything they should be educating the people on healthy
When Biblical scholars debate this they lose the true meaning of the text. They become more focused on proving it to be factual rather than looking at the scripture for what it is. The scientific theory is backed by better evidence and is more likely to be true, there is too much evidence to ignore it, and therefore it should be accepted for the most part. Then Genesis can be used as a metaphorical story that allows us to understand more fully who God really is. Genesis 1-2 can show us that God is all-powerful and all-loving.
However, I do not find the argument to be that convincing. After reading this argument, I did not find it to have stimulated my mental capacities. However, based on what it has presented, the argument is valid and most of all makes sense because it originates from definitions that provide a solid base for the argument. The objections to this argument do raise several valid points to the concept of whether or not the “maximally great” being in question does have a universal position across all the worlds he may or may not exist in. What if there is no level of “maximal greatness” in one world?
The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power is called religion. Religion played a huge role in the pre-modern era. Different types of religion and beliefs changed the way they lived as a society bases. The Paleolithic Hunter and Gatherers, Neolithic Farmers, Agrarian Civilizations, and Axial Religions were people of different groups who lived in the pre-modern era that also had different views in religion. Societies and beliefs were changed but they always united people as one.
Since when did it become a morally acceptable policy to solve social problems by killing millions of people? We can’t murder people just because some liberal population control groups assert that our planet is overcrowded, just as we couldn’t kill toddlers because there are too many kids in the house. Planned Parenthood wouldn’t agree with my logic. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood wrote, "The most merciful thing a large family can do for one of its infant members is to kill it.” Suppose there is a severe overpopulation problem. Suppose it could be demonstrated that the standard of living is higher in
The jurors cannot base their certainty on concrete evidence as the play indicates that very few facts are absolute because (quote). Instead, they must make up their minds based on the apparent likelihood of various events and on their own personal beliefs. Rose portrays that when it is difficult to maintain certainty about one’s beliefs, in this case the innocence or guilt of the boy, doubt is a reasonable and intelligent state of mind. This is proven by the 4th Juror and the 11th Juror when they say they “ … now have reasonable doubt”. Each of the jurors has a different degree of certainty about the opinions they hold, but cannot be completely sure, as the 9th Juror points out “He doesn’t say the boy is not guilty.
Something important to consider when looking at the theory of relativism is that it is just a theory. I personally believe it to be a good theory in general, but it should not be interpreted as a foundation for a belief structure. Nor should it be applied to every set of circumstances encountered throughout life. It is purely illogical to assume that one single theory will provide us with the proper guidance required to successfully negotiate every “right or wrong” decision. Relativism allows people to understand that individuals develop belief structures
Janika Hirvi Evaluate the role of reason as a way of knowing Sometimes I am surrounded by a lot of questionable things, whether there is someone controlling us, are we real, how do we know things? For these questions there are no right or wrong answers, but can we know, when our knowledge is heading into the right direction? In the world there are a lot of things were you can doubt, but still you have to make your own decisions what no one else can do for you, other people can just persuade you. We can assume many things, what are not explainable with reason, but it can lead us to a false conclusion. When conclusions are made, they are made usually through reasoning.
Definition: Justification of violence is when there is a legitimate reason to be violent to an animate object. My reasons for agreeing are as follows: In the 10 Commandments God teaches not to kill. (Killing is a form of violence). When God gave these commandments to Moses he expected them to be followed, without them the Jewish people would be corrupt and chaotic. For example, If you kill someone you have destroyed the equality between yourself and the person you have killed as you have decided for them to die and for you to live.