PHIL 3600 -- Philosophy of Religion
Spring 2014
Prof. Chris Heathwood
University of Colorado Boulder

 

Philosophy 3600 - Philosophy of Religion

Final Exam Study Guide

 

The final exam will cover everything we've done since the midterm, that is, the following topics:

The final exam will take place over two days. The first day there will be a very short answer exam -- i.e., multiple choice, true/false, fill-in-the-blank-type questions. The second day will be a short answer exam, which will have questions like the ones below.

To prepare:

Let me emphasize the importance of actually writing out answers to these questions. We often think we understand something -- until we try to put it in writing. Only then do we realize we don't really understand it. If you don't write out your answers, you won't know what you don't know.

 

Study Questions

The Ontological Argument

  1. (a) What does Anselm mean by 'God'?
  2. (a) Explain Anselm's distinction between existence in reality and existence in the understanding.
    (b) Give an example of something that exists in the understanding but not in reality.
    (c) Give an example of something that exists both in reality and in the understanding.
    (d) Does anything exist in reality but not in the understanding? If not, explain why not. If so, can you give an example? If so, do so. If not, explain why not.
  3. (a) Define 'negative existential'?
    (b) Give an example of a negative existential.
    (c) What is the Problem of Negative Existentials? Explain the problem thoroughly.
    (d) What is the Anselmian Solution to the Problem of Negative Existentials? First state the solution in general terms, and then illustrate it with two examples: one involving a true negative existential and the other involving a false negative existential.
  4. State and explain Anselm's Ontological Argument. Be sure to justify each step in the reasoning. Be sure to state and discuss the thesis about greatness that the argument relies upon, and to illustrate it using an independent example.
  5. (a) Explain Gaunilo's "Lost Isle" Parody Argument and how it is supposed to make trouble for Anselm's Argument.
    (b) Explain why Plantinga thinks Gaunilo's Parody Argument is not in fact analogous to Anselm's Argument?
  6. (a) As we understood it in class, what does Kant mean when he says that existence is not a real property?
    (b) Give an example of a property that is real and explain why it's real.
    (c) Give an example of a property that is not real and explain why it's not real.
    (d) If Kant is right that existence in reality is not a real property, which part of Anselm's argument, according to Heathwood, is in trouble?
    (e) Explain, in your own words, Kant's argument for his view that existence in reality is not a real property.

The Fine-Tuning Argument

  1. Explain in detail two ways in which the universe is apparently "just right" or fine-tuned for life.
  2. (a) Fully state the Fine-Tuning Argument in line-by-line format, as we stated it in class.
    (b) Give the rationale for each of the first three premises.
    (c) Illustrate the fourth premise by means of a neutral example.
    (d) What sort of God does the Fine-Tuning argument support, if it's successful?
  3. (a) Explain the "Other Forms of Life" Objection to the Fine-Tuning Argument.
    (b) Explain the reply to this objection that we presented in class.
  4. (a) Explain the Multiple Universes Objection to the Fine-Tuning Argument.
    (b) Explain the reply to this objection that we presented in class.

The "No Evidence" Argument

  1. (a) Fully state the "No Evidence" Argument in line-by-line format, as we stated it in class.
  2. (a) How does Hawthorn define 'knowable a priori'?
    (b) Give an example of a claim that seems to be self-evident.
    (c) Give an example of a claim that is a priori but not self-evident.
    (d) Give an example of a claim that is very obviously true but not self-evident.
  3. Hawthorn highlights two main kinds of (empirical) evidence.
    (a) What is the first one? Explain it. Give an example of something we know on the basis of that kind of evidence.
    (b) What is the second one? Explain it. Give an example of something we know on the basis of that kind of evidence.
    (c) Fully state the rationale for P3 of the "No Evidence" Argument (the premise that is about whether there is evidence for God's existence)?
  4. (a) What is the Thomistic Account of Self-Evidence?
    (b) Why does Aquinas think that the claim that God exists is not self-evident? Explain in detail.
  5. (a) If the Ontological Argument is sound, which premise of the "No Evidence" Argument is mistaken? (State the premise.)
    (b) If the Fine-Tuning Argument is sound, which premise of the "No Evidence" Argument is mistaken? (State the premise.)
    (c) If a person has a convincing enough religious experience, which premise of the "No Evidence" Argument will he/she conclude is mistaken? (State the premise.)
    (d) If Pascal's Wager is sound, which premise of the "No Evidence" Argument is mistaken? (State the premise.)
  6. (a) Explain Hawthorn's objection to the Thomistic Account of Self-Evidence.
    (b) State Hawthorns own account of self-evidence. (We discussed various forms it might take; any of these forms is fine.)
    (c) Explain Hawthorn's account of faith, and show how it is supposed to answer the "No Evidence" argument.

The Argument from Divine Silence

  1. (a) Fully state the Argument from Divine Silence in line-by-line format, as we stated it in class.
    (b) Give a rationale for P1.
    (c) Give a rationale for P2.
    (d) Explain Hawthorn's reply to this argument.

Life after Death

  1. (a) The question, "Is there life after death?," can be understood in a way that makes it trivial to answer. Explain that interpretation of the question and what the answer is
    (b) How does Kagan propose that we understand the question to avoid such triviality?
  2. (a) State and explain dualism.
    (b) Is dualism friendly or unfriendly to the possibility of life after death? Explain.
  3. (a) State and explain physicalism.
    (b) Is physicalism friendly or unfriendly to the possibility of life after death? Explain.
 
 

home