Climacus and the Arguments for God’s Existence

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentin Teodorescu
Keyword(s):  
Natural Theology ◽  
Ontological Argument ◽  
Existence Of God ◽  
Teleological Argument ◽  
Positive Assessment ◽  
Sensus Divinitatis ◽  
Reformed Epistemology ◽  
General Objection ◽  
Religious Objection

AbstractThis article offers an evaluation of Climacus’ objections to the arguments for the existence of God. With one exception (the critique of the ontological argument, which seems to anticipate the contemporary logico-empiricist position), these objections are found wanting. In the first general objection, Climacus seems to jump illegitimately from the objective reality of God’s existence (or non-existence) to the subjective conviction about God’s existence (or nonexistence). In the second, one might find exceptions to Climacus’ assertion that one can never deduce the existence of persons from the facts of the palpable world. Next, the objection against the teleological argument is inconclusive, since, in my opinion, Climacus does not offer a clear structure to-or critique of-this argument. Lastly, the ethico-religious objection fails because God’s existence- even if one would accept the reality of a sensus divinitatis-is not yet transparently evident to us. Nonetheless, in Climacus’ treatment of all these objections we observe similarities with certain ideas of contemporary reformed epistemology: a skepticism with regard to natural theology, a belief in a sensus divinitatis, and a positive assessment of the role of faith as an epistemological presupposition.

The Problem of Natural Theology

1972 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-333
Author(s):  
N. H. G. Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Natural Theology ◽  
Ontological Argument ◽  
Karl Barth ◽  
Existence Of God

It is a curious fact that the much maligned ontological argument to prove the existence of God has in recent times enjoyed a revival of interest to which even Karl Barth, the arch-enemy of natural theology has contributed; but since the revival of interest has appared in a wide diversity of intellectual contexts, both philosophical and theological, the revival is itself almost as problematic as the argument itself.

scholarly journals ¿Puede la intolerancia religiosa ser justificada? Sensus divinitatis, diversidad

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge Sierra Merchán
Keyword(s):  
Epistemic Justification ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Knowledge Of God ◽  
Religious Intolerance ◽  
Belief In God ◽  
Palabras Clave ◽  
Sensus Divinitatis ◽  
Reformed Epistemology ◽  
Natural Belief

Calvino plantea, a través de la idea de sensus divinitatis (esto es, que hay un conocimiento implantado de Dios), una justificación a favor de la intolerancia religiosa y de la persecución y castigo a los herejes. Pero ¿es válida esta justificación de la intolerancia religiosa, como piensa Calvino? Según Hume, es posible desarrollar argumentos evolutivos desacreditadores en contra de la existencia del sensus divinitatis basados en la explicación naturalista de la creencia en Dios y en la diversidad religiosa. Y según Schellenberg, es posible plantear, además, un argumento basado en el problema del ocultamiento divino. Los argumentos evolutivos desacreditadores establecen que si una creencia es producida por mecanismos no fiables que no rastrean la verdad, entonces dicha creencia carece de justificación epistémica. El objetivo de este trabajo es analizar y evaluar los dos argumentos evolutivos desacreditadores de Hume y el argumento de Schellenberg, los cuales intentar socavar la epistemología reformada de Calvino y Plantinga, y su defensa externalista de la racionalidad del teísmo. Mostraré que los tres argumentos son válidos y logran demostrar la falsedad del teísmo externalista. Con ello, espero hacer evidente la importancia de la crítica a la racionalidad del teísmo reformado durante la Ilustración escocesa, pues para Hume, el papel crítico de la filosofía se constituye en un remedio contra el fanatismo religioso, a la vez que promueve la idea de una democracia basada en la tolerancia religiosa y la libertad de conciencia. Palabras clave: sensus divinitatis, epistemología reformada, Calvino, Plantinga, argumentos evolutivos desacreditadores, racionalidad, teísmo, Hume, Schellemberg, Reforma. **************************************************************************************** Can religious intolerance be justified? Sensus divinitatis, religious diversity and the divine occult Hume and Schellenberg against Calvino. AbstractCalvino presents, through the idea of sensus divinitatis (which means, that we have knowledge of God implanted in us), a justification for religious intolerance and persecution and punishment of heretics. But, is religious intolerance a valid justification as Calvino thinks? According to Hume, it is possible to develop evolutionary arguments against the existence of sensus divinitatis based on a natural belief in God and in religious diversification. Additionally, according to Schellenberg, it is possible to state an argument based on the problem of the divine occult. The discrediting evolutionary arguments state that if a believe is produced through unreliable mechanisms that don’t follow reality, then such a believe lacks an epistemic justification. The objective of this work is to analyze and evaluate Hume’s two discrediting evolutionary arguments as well as Schellenberg’s argument, all of which try to undermine the epistemology formulated by Calvino and Plantinga, and their externalist defense of a national theism. I will demonstrate that the three arguments are valid and show how this externalist theism is false. With this, I expect to show the importance of critiquing the theism reasoning as it was reformed during the Scottish Illustration, for Hume the critical role of philosophy constitutes the solution against religious fanaticism, while at the same time, promoting the idea of a democracy based on religious tolerance and freedom of conscience. Key words: Sensus Divinitatis, Reformed Epistemology, Calvino, Plantinga, Discrediting evolutionary Aarguments, reasoning, theism, Hume, Schellenberg, Reformation. **************************************************************************************** Pode a intolerancia religiosa se justificar? Sensus divinitatis, diversidade religiosa e ocultamento divino Hume e Schellenberg contra Calvino ResumoCalvino salienta com a idéia de Sensus Divinitatis, a justificação da intolerância religiosa e a perseguição e castigo dos hereges. Mas é realmente justificada esta ideia? Segundo Hume é possível desenvolver argumentos evolutivos desacreditadores contra a existência do Sensus Divinitatis baseados na explicação naturalista da crença em deus e a diversidade religiosa. Segundo Schellenberg também é possível argumentar o ocultamento divino. Segundo os argumentos evolutivos desacreditadores se uma crença é produzida por mecanismos não fiáveis, ela carece de justificação epistêmica. O objetivo do artigo é analisar e avaliar os argumentos evolutivos desacreditadores de Hume e Schellenberg que tentam detonar a epistemologia de Calvino e Plantinga, baseados na defesa da racionalidade do teísmo. Os três argumentos são validos e conseguem demostrar a falsidade do teísmo externalista, assim no artigo se mostra a importância da crítica à racionalidade do teísmo, pois segundo Hume constitui um remédio contra o fanatismo religioso e promove a ideia democrática da liberdade de consciência. Palavras chave: sensos divinitatis, epistemologia reformada, Calvino, Platinga, argumentos evolutivos desacreditadores, racionalidade, teísmo, Hume, Schellemberg, reforma.

HOW REFORMED IS REFORMED EPISTEMOLOGY? ALVIN PLANTINGA AND CALVIN'S ‘SENSUS DIVINITATIS’

1997 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 419-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
DEREK S. JEFFREYS
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
Sense Perception ◽  
Christian Belief ◽  
Alvin Plantinga ◽  
Existence Of God ◽  
Statistical Probability ◽  
Belief In God ◽  
Sensus Divinitatis ◽  
Reformed Epistemology ◽  
Cognitive Environment

In his recent two volumes on epistemology, Alvin Plantinga surveys contemporary theories of knowledge thoroughly, and carefully defends an externalist epistemology. He promises that in a third volume, Warranted Christian Belief, he will present John Calvin's sensus divinitatis as an epistemic module akin to sense perception, a priori knowledge, induction, testimony and other epistemic modules. Plantinga defines the sensus divinitatis as a ‘many sided disposition to accept belief in God (or propositions that immediately and obviously entail the existence of God) in a variety of circumstances’. Like other epistemic modules, it produces beliefs in an appropriate cognitive environment, aims at the production of true beliefs, and generates beliefs which have a high statistical probability of being true.

Natural Theology and the Concept of Perfection in Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz

1989 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 459-475
Author(s):  
Mark O. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Natural Theology ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Ontological Argument ◽  
Existence Of God ◽  
Concept Of God ◽  
Analytic Work ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Idea Of God

One of the hallmarks of the early modern rationalists was their confidence that a great deal of metaphysics could be done by purely a priori reasoning. They thought so at least partly because they inherited via Descartes Anselm's confidence that the existence of God could be established by purely a priori reasoning in an ontological argument. They also inherited a Thomistic and scholastic confidence that the concept of God as supremely perfect being, if subjected to serious and deep analysis, would yield sound doctrine. Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz all three took it that they had in their stock of ideas an idea of God sufficiently clear and detailed that a little analytic work could produce real metaphysical results, not only about God himself, but also about the universe in which they found themselves (for Spinoza, these turned out to be the same thing). Though they start with what purport to be ideas of the same God, they get radically different results in their analyses.

Peranan Komisaris dan Direksi Bank Syariah dalam Pengelolaan Dana Zakat dan ISR (Islamic Social Responsibility) di Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 95
Author(s):  
Melia Frastuti ◽  
Dimas Pratama Putra ◽  
Erfan Effendi
Keyword(s):  
Social Responsibility ◽  
Commercial Banks ◽  
Linear Regression Analysis ◽  
Multiple Linear Regression Analysis ◽  
Islamic Banks ◽  
The Public ◽  
Islamic Bank ◽  
Positive Assessment ◽  
Nature Preservation

Abstract     Almsgiving is one of the pillars supporting the upholding of Islam as the obligation for the adherents to improve horizontal relations between fellow humans and strengthen vertical relations with Allah SWT. The implementation of Islamic Social Responsibility (ISR) of the Islamic Bank gives a positive assessment in sharia agreement, justice and equality, responsibility for work, welfare, guarantee of nature preservation and benevolent assistance that is not profit-oriented.Proper almsgiving management and ISR implementation make Islamic banks trusted by the public in terms of service quality, satisfaction and loyalty of Muzzaki. It reduces bad images, and provides relevant impacts on social welfare and the progress of the era. The data analysis used to test the hypotheses is Multiple Linear Regression analysis. The data is collected by distributing questionnaires to Commissioners and Directors at 14 (fourteen) Islamic Commercial Banks spread throughout Indonesia. The result of this study shows partially prove the role of Islamic bank commissioners in the amsgiving management only, while the importance of the role of directors in Islamic banks in almsgiving management and the implementation of ISR partially. Keywords: Islamic Bank, Commissioners, Directors, Almsgiving and ISR

The Greatest Possible Being

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff Speaks
Keyword(s):  
Philosophical Theology ◽  
Divine Attributes ◽  
Existence Of God ◽  
Concept Of God ◽  
Attributes Of God

Philosophical theology is the attempt to use reason to determine the attributes of God. An ancient tradition, which is perhaps more influential now than ever, tries to derive the attributes of God from the principle that God is the greatest possible being. This book argues that that constructive project is a failure. It also argues that the principle that God is the greatest possible being is unsuited to play two other theoretical roles. The first of these is the role of setting the limits of the concept of God, particularly in the context of debates over the existence of God. The second is the role of explaining the meaning of ‘God.’ This leaves us with three unanswered questions. If the principle that God is the greatest possible being can’t deliver results about the divine attributes, define the concept of God, or give the meaning of the name ‘God,’ what can? The last chapter makes some initial steps toward answering these questions.

scholarly journals "Deus semper maior" or theodicy of Erycha River

2018 ◽  
pp. 67-73
Author(s):  
Bogdan Teodorovich Zavidniak
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Understanding ◽  
Human Person ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Existence Of God ◽  
Concept Of God ◽  
Spiritual World ◽  
Analogia Entis

This article examines Erich Przywara‘s conceptual understanding of the proofs for the existence of God. It also interprets the proofs of God’s existence. Тhe concept of God in the philosophy of Przywara is considered by exploring the nature of the relations between the transcendent sphere of God and the spiritual world of the human person. From the point of view of historiography, the role of the book “The Analogia entis” by Przywara is highlighted.

Faith and Conscience—The Surest of Arguments for the Existence of God

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-268
Author(s):  
Tadeusz Grzesik
Keyword(s):  
Ontological Argument ◽  
John Henry Newman ◽  
Existence Of God

In the first part of my paper, I shall consider how Anselm of Canterbury’s so-called ontological argument has been misapprehended by those treating it as a proof for the existence of God. In the second part, I shall focus on Chapter One of the Proslogion and on the Epistola de incarnatione Verbi to show what Anselm’s real purpose was regarding the problem of the existence of God. I shall support my view by referring also to the thought of John Henry Newman and Henri de Lubac.

The Ontological Argument Revisited: A Reply to Rowe

2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-44
Author(s):  
Eric Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Ontological Argument ◽  
Logical Analysis ◽  
Existence Of God

Saint Anselm’s Ontological Argument is perhaps the most intriguing of all the traditional speculative proofs for the existence of God. Yet, his argument has been rejected outright by many philosophers. Most challenges stem from the basic conviction that no amount of logical analysis of a concept that is limited to the bounds of the “understanding” will ever be able to “reason” the existence in “reality” of anything answering such a limited concept. However, it is not the intent of this paper to prove or disprove Anselm’s argument. Rather, in this paper we concern ourselves with arriving at a sound interpretation of Anselm’s leading critic—Immanuel Kant. Kant put forth perhaps the most vaunted criticism of Anselm’s argument. However, Kant has been perhaps the most misunderstood objector to Anselm’s argument. This paper confirms that charge, simultaneously offering what I believe to be a sound interpretation of Kant’s criticism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document