- What are the stakes? o Neither is dominant… - What if the matrix changes?
- This is STRICK dominance - if Red wine and fish were 25… it would be WEAK dominance 12)What is Clifford’s Principle? - “it is wrong everywhere and always to believe anything upon insufficient evidence” o believing on the basis of faith is wrong because it doesn’t give evidence THE ARGUMENT: - 1. For every belief, however seemingly trivial, there might very well be an important effect on someone o Basically: he’s saying you never truly know about an action until it happens - 2. If a belief might have an important effect on someone, then it is wrong to hold the belief except on sufficient evidence - 3. Therefore: a belief is wrong unless held upon sufficient evidence Examples to know and to understand (Know what the point of the examples is in each case) 1.The perfect island example. - Don’t we have an idea of the greatest conceivable island? - If it only exists in the mind, wouldn’t there be a greater conceivable island which did exist in reality? - So the greatest conceivable island exists in reality! (this is FALSE) 2.Paley’s watch example: finding the watch vs. a stone (this example is lengthy) - When we come to inspect the watch, we perceive – what we could not discover in the stone – that its several parts are framed and put together for a purpose. E.g. that they are so formed and adjusted as to produce motion, and that motion so regulated as to point out the hour of the day o A watch has designs; therefore, we would assume that someone designed the watch o Extension: what if the watch could reproduce? o What if we had never seen a watch made? - Objection to Paley o We had to find something. Whatever we found would have some internal structure, which could serve some purpose. So, there’s nothing that needs to be explained in the case of the watch. o What’s this mean: our foot would always be in front of SOMETHING. Everything has a structure and everything serves a purpose… o Does this objection succeed against Paley? A watch only has one purpose. A rock could have many, so where does this leave us? We already know that a watch is manmade. Paley should have chosen an unidentifiable object that could serve a purpose and was manmade that showed all the signs of design 3.Rowe’s example of the fawn trapped by the fallen tree. - This example is that a fawn suffers an awful death from a fallen tree – it introduces us to the topic of Natural Evil (discussed in part one) and free will - God gives us the ability to have free will – to make our own choices 4.The Cain and Abel story in Stump. - Follows the discussion of free will - Cain kills Abel over jealousy that the Lord favors Abel - Stump says Abel was not in harm’s way, but rather Cain was because his union with God was severed. After his act and God’s punishment, Cain finds a “humbling recognition of himself as evil” and desires to be in a better “state” o As in – union with God 5.The alphabet tile example. - If the tiles spelled out something significant, we would find an explanation for it - If the tiles spelled out nonsense, we would ignore it o We think of this in terms of reason as to why we have life 6.The ship owner example from Clifford. - A man owns a ship that many have said is unfit for sea voyage. The ship owner ignores the other people’s concern and let’s several people take the ship out to sea. As claimed – the ship was unfit and the people on board died. Clifford says the deaths are the ship owner’s fault because he did not have sufficient evidence to believe that his ship was sound. He DID, however, have reason to believe it was unworthy of sea voyage. Arguments to know and understand Enjoy the Christmas Theme (as break is soon approaching!!) The ontological argument - 1. We have an idea of God as the greatest conceivable being - 2. So, God exists at least as an idea in the mind (1) - 3. If a being exists only in the mind and not also in reality, then there is a greater conceivable being that exists in both the mind and reality - 4. But there is no greater conceivable being than God - 5. So, God exists in reality and not only in the mind (2,3,4) Just understand the functions of the argument – don’t memorize it 1.The cosmological argument. (Again, no memorization necessary but understand its workings). - “causes” o some things are caused o things in the natural world can’t cause themselves o the chain of causation cannot continue infinitely, it must come to an end o God must be the creator of cause 2.Paley’s design argument - Aquinas’s fifth way o Basic Argument: many things in nature are very well-suited to certain useful purposes; the best explanation of their being adapted is that they were designed by God for those purposes; thus, (very likely) God exists 3.The argument from evil. - Basically: There is unnecessary evil. This existence makes the existence of God incompatible. So, God doesn’t exist. 4.The fine-tuning argument. Know the basic form given on my slides. - Basic version of the argument: o The natural constants are finely tuned for life; had they been different, life would have been impossible; the best explanation of this tuning is that God exists and tuned them. Thus, very likely God exists The constants of nature are in a very narrow range Evolution can support God’s existence… 5.Know how the fine-tuning argument improves on Paley’s design argument. - Paley’s design argument could be faulted by evolution. The fine-tuning one is nearly supported by evolution (therefore not falsifying it) 6. Know Stump’s reply to the problem of evil. (There are several parts: the greatest good is union with God, greatest evil separation from god; we are fallen, and the only way to get us to the greatest good is to enable us to will God to fix our wills; this requires our recognition that we need help and our desire for God to help us; evil is necessary in order to help us achieve this recognition and desire.) - Stump’s big argument is that of Free Will. In this, she says God gives us the ability to choose. Since Adam (the first man created by God) ate from the tree of knowledge, humans have fallen from the grace of God – as in, we are imperfect. We tend to lean to our “dark” side rather than the side of the Lord. - She also speaks about the REASONS for so called “unnecessary evil” (Stump says, on the contrary, these evils ARE necessary and that they aren’t really evils) o Acting on evil whims makes us reflect on the “transience of temporal goods and turn us to other worldly goods” 7.Why might the multiverse hypothesis spoil the fine-tuning argument? - What is it: our universe is just one among an infinite number where all possible natural laws could/can exist…but we exist only on earth - What does it due to the fine tuning argument: o The laws of nature work perfectly to sustain life here. What’s the explanation of this factor – that God exists and created the conditions for life. The multiverse hypothesis comes in because maybe our universe allowing life is like the example of the woman winning the lottery – SOMEONE had to win the lottery… It would only make sense that SOME universe would support life (some universe had to win the lottery) So, supporting life isn’t that significant (what?) – BASICALLY – it doesn’t need explaining If you believe this hypothesis, there is reason to doubt the fine tuning argument 8.In the lecture on Pascal there are 2 wager arguments. The first is a dominance argument, the second is an expected utility argument. Have a sense of how it goes, and under what conditions it succeeds. - Dominance and Utility correlate. Basically, you can make a chart as follows
If you want to learn more check out what coding scheme is used by most microcomputers
- In this table, you insert X and Y as the values you’re testing. - Next, on the right, you insert variable 1 and 2. - Here, we are determining X and Y’s expected utility (which has a better outcome) - The numbers 3, 8, 5, and 10 are the outcomes of each “reaction” so to say (I couldn’t think of a better term) - Let’s say the it is a 1-10 scale and 1 is the “better” end of an outcome - We see that X paired with 1 gives us the BEST utility out of any other combination (X and 2, Y and 1, Y and 2) - Therefore, X paired with 1 expresses dominance 9.What is Clifford’s response to the claim that we shouldn’t criticize beliefs but only actions? - Clifford’s argument is actually directly contrary to this. - He says NOT ONLY should we criticize people for their actions, but we should also criticize them for their beliefs Things to know how to do 1.Calculate expected utility given decision matrices and probabilities of the states. - Bringing back the last utility chart…
If you want to learn more check out keenan kidwell
- how to solve: o Expected Utility of 1= 3 (times the chances of this happening ~ ¼) + 8 (times the chances of an outcome can happen ~ ¼) o Expected Utiltiy of 2 = 5 (times the chances of this happening ~ ¼) + 10 (times the chances of an outcome can happen ~ ¼) This helps you find the utility with the best outcome 2.Complete gaps in arguments to make them valid. - This isn’t something I can outline for you, but this is sort of cumulative from Day 1 of this class and you should be able to handle it. Hope this Study Guide helps and good luck! ~ Gabbie
Don't forget about the age old question of jmu health
We also discuss several other topics like 203.2mm to inches
We also discuss several other topics like neurology nursing study guide
If you want to learn more check out light from the left half of the world strikes what part of the retina?