KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Philosophy The Problem of Evil Knowledge Organiser

Key words The Vale of Soul Making Theodicy: John Hick • Process Thought: David Griffin and A.N. Whitehead - Human beings are always developing towards perfection – they were made imperfectly. • - God is not omnipotent, he did not create the world ex nihilo • Evil – something that is inherently bad, which causes - Evil has a good purpose because through encountering it humanity can develop. (out of nothing) but instead the world was already in human suffering. - God is omni-benevolent, it is loving to allow humanity to perform evil acts. He is justified existence: Griffin offers a new translation of Genesis 1:1. “In • Moral Evil – evil that is caused by humankind, through creating the world this way, and has a good plan for all of humanity. the beginning, the earth was without form and void.” - Human goodness is more valuable to God when humans freely choose to be good. • God is immanent (intimately involved in creation) PHILOSOPHY commission (action) or omission (inaction). Examples - The world is known as the “vale of soul making” (the place where souls are improved) as it meaning that he cannot intervene in the world from the include rape and murder. is the place where humans develop their souls and become better over time. outside to stop evil. This can be related to the • Natural Evil – evil that naturally occurs in the world and is - God left humanity to complete the process of creation themselves – they are unfinished. pantheistic idea that God is like the soul of the universe. - This was part of God’s plan. • God has the power to influence humanity only, he not caused by humankind, but does cause human - They are created in the image of God, and have potential to be in the likeness of God in the cannot control people’s behaviour or the world’s suffering. Examples include floods and hurricanes. future (Genesis 1:26). They achieve this through encountering evil. events. Human free will is to great, God cannot override Theodicy – the justification of God’s existence as an - God is at an epistemic distance from the world, this ensures that people have total freedom it. • to follow him, this allows them to fully morally develop. • Instead, God offers possibilities for how humans can omnipotent, omniscient and omni-benevolent being whilst - At the end of our lives, we will all get the chance to go to heaven, because God is behave, and tries to persuade them to do good. evil exits in the world. omnibenevolent. • God has a will in everything, but not everything that occurs is God's will. • Classical Theism – the three Abrahamic faiths (Christianity, The Free Will Defence: Richard Swinburne & Alvin Plantinga - God is intimately involved in the world, not at an Islam and Judaism). - For humans to be truly free and to have total free will, God cannot intervene in the world. epistemic distance. • Soul-deciding – the belief that one can decide where their - If he acted in the world to prevent evil and suffering, he would jeopardise human freedom. Plantinga: - He suffers when moral evil stops him from being able to freedom is so valuable it is worth human suffering. This would stop humans from being responsible for help humanity to be better. soul will inhabit the afterlife through believing or rejecting the evil and suffering that they inflict on others by either omission or commission. - A. N. Whitehead: God is “the fellow sufferer who Jesus. - God cannot act outside the realms of logical possibility – it would be impossible to create a world understands.” (Process and Reality). Soul-making – the belief that one can develop their soul to where humans had true free will and always chose to do good. - Moral evil exists as humans choose to do evil, and were • - Richard Swinburne, The Existence of God: “the less God allows men to bring about large-scale created imperfectly. become more perfect and thus experience heaven in the horrors, the less freedom and responsibility he gives them.” - Natural evil exists as the world has the potential to go afterlife. - Swinburne offers an account of one natural evil: death. Death is a natural evil that is essential to the wrong. Free Will Defence: it means are lifetimes are limited and so we have genuine responsibility for our actions. If we were immortal and had infinite chances to do the right thing, we would not take responsibility and choose good.Death also puts a limit on suffering, it shows that God is not cruel, he has mercy and allows people to escape suffering when they die Other Responses: Augustine. The Problem of Evil – always discuss briefly at the start of an A01 question. • God’s creation was perfect. • Logical: This has been a question throughout the centuries, starting with Epicurus. David Hume • In a perfect creation humanity must have free will. rephrases this question – asking why evil exists. He argues that God is either “impotent” because • Humans misused their free will and broke the natural order, he wants to stop evil but cannot, or is “malevolent” because he can stop evil but chooses not to. this allowed the possibility of evil. This is a logical contradiction: if God is all-powerful and all-loving, why doesn’t he stop evil? Hume • All evil is “sin or the punishment for sin.” therefore concludes that the God of classical theism cannot exist. Supported by Mackie, “A wholly • Humans are deserving of punishment because they were good being eliminates evil as far as it can.” and the Inconsistent Triad. “seminally present in the loins of Adam.” • Evidential: William Rowe argues that the scale of human and animal suffering that occurs on a • Evil is not a force in itself, but rather an absence of good. This J.L. Mackie’s “inconsistent triad” = 3 statements where only 2 daily basis proves that God cannot exist. God cannot have a good purpose for evil because the is called a privation. can be true at the same time. As there is already evil in the extent of it is too great. Uses the example of the fawn dying in a forest fire and the “Case of Sue” • Because of this, God had to become human as Jesus the Son (rape and murder of 5 year old girl in 1986) to support the idea that suffering is everywhere, and die on a cross to allow humans to be reconciled to the world, the only conclusion can be that the God of Classical constant and pointless. He argues that a good and loving God could not justify the amount of evil natural order. Theism cannot exist, as He is either not omnipotent or in the world for any reason. • Because God is omniscient, people are predestined to go to omnibenevolent. heaven or hell. 232 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Strengths of the Free Will Defence Weaknesses of the Free Will Defence Strengths of the Vale of Soul Making Weaknesses of the Vale of Soul Making - The free will defence offers a logical - Peter Vardy does not think it gives adequate - The emphasis on human -Evidential problem remains: does there really need to explanation for evil, by removing the explanation for natural evil. Many examples of development falls in line with the be so much evil? Surely we could learn from less? natural evil do not have a greater good behind -Does not explain why suffering appears to be blame of the existence of evil from them. theory of evolution. This is important distributed so inconsistently – e.g. developed world vs God and placing it on to mankind. - Floods and disease appear to have no human as it gives it academic credibility, as developing world. - The defence explains how God can cause, for example. - William Rowe’s Evidential Problem of evil is evolution is now seen as scientific -The suffering of some seems to benefit the remain omniscient, omnipotent and not solved by TFWD: why does there have to fact. development of others: does God have favourites? omnibenevolent whilst evil exists. be so much evil? Why do people have to - Supported by Christian tradition by (Countered by Hick’s view of free will and God not - Encourages ‘development’ of human suffer so badly as part of God’s plan? getting involved). - relying on Irenaeus. character which is morally desirable. J.L. Mackie argues that as God is omnipotent -Is it fair that everyone eventually goes to heaven? he could have created humans with the - Rationally accounts for all types of The Defence wants humans to learn -D.Z. Phillips: It would never be justifiable to hurt emotional intelligence to always choose the evil whilst upholding the 3 O’s of the from their mistake in their limited good action, so stopping human suffering: someone in order to help them. earthly lives. Learning from the “there cannot be a logical impossibility in his classically theistic characters of God. -Mary Midgely: by suggesting that God is ultimately freely choosing the good on every occasion.” responsible for allowing evil then it does not highlight consequences of our mistakes help - Epistemic distance explains why God The fact that He doesn’t do this implies His does not interfere in human sufficiently our responsibility for moral evil. us to be better people and to limit evil non-existence. -Christians are concerned that Hick takes away from and suffering. - A group of philosophers called Determinists suffering. the idea of Jesus as saviour. Instead he becomes a argue that Freedom is an illusion so TFWD is - Swinburne explains why God does teacher of how to live morally. built on an incorrect principle – no choice is not stop suffering, because he values truly free because all choices come from a -Contradicts both Bible and Qur’an (not compatible human freedom that he created. prior cause, like a chain reaction. This cause with Classical Theism). is believed to be God, who allowed evil into the world. Strengths of Process Thought Weaknesses of Process Thought Practice Questions: A01: - Remove’s the logical problem, by -Not a theodicy: thought to be a major weakness 1. Examine the concepts of natural and moral evil and religious responses to the problem of evil. agreeing with Mackie’s inconsistent that PT is not a justification of God in the face of 2. Examine how the Vale of Soul Making theodicy accounts for natural evil. triad, God is not omnipotent. evil, because it no longer upholds his 3 3. Examine how Process thought solves the problem of evil. - It explains why natural evil exists – characteristics. Unacceptable on religious and 4. Examine how the free will defence justifies the existence of God in the face of the problem of the world was made from imperfect philosophical grounds. -Co-sufferer is only comforting if God is regarded as evil. substances to begin with, so has the omnipotent – it is God’s choice to suffer with us A02: potential to go wrong. (shown on the cross). More comforting that him 1. “The Vale of Soul Making is unacceptable as a theodicy.” Evaluate this statement. (40) - God has personal experience of what PHILOSOPHY being “in the soup” as well (Brian Davis). 2. “Process theodicy is the best theodicy.” Assess this view. (40) people are going through – -Why is this God worthy of worship? 3. “The existence of evil disproves the existence of God.” Analyse this claim. (40) comforting, strengthens believers -Logically, there is no guarantee in this process that 4. “Religious responses to the problem of evil are reasonable.” Evaluate this statement. (40) relationships with Him. God is not good will triumph over evil in the end. distant. - Concurrent with evolutionary theory – God is seen as being responsible for it. This removes the problem of the creation story being scientifically inaccurate. 233 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Philosophy Arguments for the Existence of God Knowledge Organiser The Design Argument: William Paley The Cosmological Argument: Thomas Aquinas The Ontological Argument: Anselm. Key words The world must have a designer based on aposteriori Aquinas uses aposteriori reasoning passed on his The Ontological Argument depends on Anselm’s definition 1. A prioi – a concept is known independent of any experience, it is reasoning: through observation one can see: observation of the cosmos. He argued that the processes of of God: Anselm defines “God” as: “a being than which inherently understood. The world is complex; the world exhibits regularity; the the universe cannot be explained by themselves. nothing greater can be conceived.” - An example of this is Aquinas’ understanding of the 5 precepts – world has a purpose. In the Summa Theologica, he wrote about his observations God is the greatest conceivable being. The world therefore shows evidence of being designed of the law of cause and effect in his work. It is greater to exist in reality than to exist only in the mind. everyone can understand them naturally, it is inherently obvious to He saw that everything within the universe is contingent on Therefore, as the greatest conceivable being, God must exist and made for a purpose, therefore he concludes that everyone. something else for it’s existence. in reality. the designer must be omnipotent, and concludes that PHILOSOPHY 2. A posteriori – a concept is known on the basis of experience. However, it would be absurd to trace this chain of causes • This argument is an a priori argument: it does not the designer is God. - An example of this is a scientific fact, which is proven right through backwards forever, there must be a starting point. require any evidence, the conclusion is innately This is further illustrated through the analogy of a - Aquinas observed the universe and saw that known just by thinking about what God is like. formulating and testing a hypothesis. watch: if a person walking across a heath found a watch everything has a limited lifespan, he therefore • The “subject” of the statement “God exists” is “God”. 3.Deductive reasoning: If the premises are true, then it would on the ground (having never seen one before) they concluded that there is no contingent being that is • The “predicate” of the statement “God exists” is be impossible for the conclusion to be false. would assume from looking at it that it had a maker – everlasting. “exists”. An example: this is because of how intricate the design is, all the - This means that at some point, before contingent • God existing is a necessary truth, not a contingent prats are designed to work together. The watch also beings, there must have been nothing in existence. one. • All men are mortal; Socrates is a man; therefore Socrates is clearly has been made for a purpose. Paley compares - ‘Ex nihilo nihil fit’ – Latin for “out of nothing This was criticised by a monk, Gaunilo, who argued that mortal. ❖ this to the universe, arguing that it too is complex and nothing will come” logically Anselm was saying that if one thought of the 4. Inductive reasoning: Gives new knowledge about what is probably intricate and has a purpose. - However, nothing can come from nothing, so the fact “greatest possible island”, in order to be the greatest it true. Paley gives examples from nature to show the that beings exist suggests that they came from a must exist in reality. This cannot be the case, which suggests that Anselm’s logic is flawed. An example: “All the cats I have observed have fur. When I go on holiday complexity and regularity that he discusses – for different kind of being, an uncaused being. - Aquinas concluded that God is a necessary being, Anselm responded: God alone possesses necessary ❖ to Portugal, the cats there will probably have fur too.” example a creature’s eye is perfectly designed for sight, who exists necessarily – this means that all existence, which means that he cannot be conceived as 5. Reason: The innate human ability to work out the truth: in this case, the planets are designed in their orbit, and birds are beings depend on God for their existence. not existing. An island does not possess necessary how the world came to exist, and if God exists. designed biologically to be perfectly suited to flying. existence. 6. Faith: The innate human ability to believe in something without logical Aquinas’ Argument helps people to have faith Paley’s Argument helps people to have faith because: Anselm’s Argument helps people to have faith because: proof for it’s existence. T because: - Uses logic and reason. - It is supported by the Design Argument. - It can be worked out without relying on unreliable 7. Fideism: relying on faith alone as a philosophical position. - Provides evidence for faith in God from the world - It uses logic and reason. synthetic propositions. 8. Cosmos: The space-time universe. around us. - Gives people a way to respond to atheism. - It is written as a prayer to help people’s faith in the 9. – the idea of something being dependent on - It is simple. - Easy to understand as it is based on evidence Proslogion. Contingency - Anselm responds to counter-arguments making ti - Gives people a way to respond to atheism. from the world around us. something else in order to exist. stronger. 10. Ex nihilo – out of nothing (the idea the world was created by God from nothing). The Nature of “proof” 11. Necessary being – a being whom all other beings depend on In your exam you may be asked to consider if the arguments about “prove” anything. You MUST define proof in this answer. Proof can be thought of it for their existence. different ways: 12. Synthetic Propositions – known on the basis of experience. - Being able to prove something true by definition, using logic (Deductive reasoning) – like in mathematics. 13. Analytic Propositions – known on the basis of logic and - Having so much evidence that a conclusion is thought so likely to be true that it is accepted as fact, but not proven to be conclusive 100% (this is how reason alone. scientists view the Theory of Evolution). 14. Ontological – the essence of something. - Proving something through a personal experience which is more powerful that facts or evidence. R.M. Hare calls this a “blik” for religious people. 15. Necessary truth – a proposition that could not possible be false. 16. Contingent truth – a truth that is dependent on something else, so When you are answering your questions, you must consider these different meanings of proof – remember that some people may believe that one is therefore may not be false. better than another. Analytic may be better than evidential, but equally science accepts evidential proof as well as logical proof. 17. Blik – R.M. Hare, a frame of reference through which everything is Fideists may believe that their personal faith and experience offers more faith than science ever can. You must consider the strengths and weaknesses of interpreted. this argument. See sample questions on the other side to help you think about this idea.

234 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Strengths of the Design Argument Weaknesses of the Design Argument (Hume) Strengths of the Cosmological Argument Weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument. - It is a simple argument – Richard - David Hume – the world could have been 1. Aquinas does not commit a fallacy of 1. Aquinas commits the “fallacy of Swinburne argues that a simpler designed by a ‘lesser being’ - One should not composition: instead he uses classic composition”: he has observed one aspect of allow the evidence to be disproportionate to aposteriori reasoning: drawing the most the universe and believes that therefore the argument which is easier to the conclusion: Just because the universe likely conclusion from what he observes. whole universe acts in that way. understand is better. shows some signs of being designed, it does 2. Aquinas argues that he is not talking about 2. Hume: talk of God is meaningless because it - It uses evidence from the world not necessarily follow that the designer must God’s logical necessity, he is talking about cannot be worked out by logic alone, be omnipotent, omni-benevolent and God’s metaphysical necessity: about the Aquinas makes “synthetic” propositions not around us which everyone can omnipotent. nature or essence of God, not about logic. “analytic” propositions: only analytic experience and understand. - The existence of evil in the world suggests 3. Aquinas explains that God is not like other statements have real reason. - Science also creates a conclusion that the designer is somehow limited or flaws, beings, because he is the only uncaused 3. If it is possible that all beings once did not based on the evidence, which tells us questioning the characteristics of God. necessary being. exist, it is possible too that God did not once - The analogy is unsound because nature does 4. This implies that the case for a necessary exist. that this is an acceptable way to not function like a watch/machine – it may not being is logically sound: why not God 4. Hume: the universe itself could be the make a reasonable conclusion. need a maker, for example the later theory of instead of the universe? necessary being – why does it need a God to - Hume’s criticism that evil’s existence evolution could explain the origin of the world. 5. Science itself assumes that there is no “brute create it? - The theory is anthropomorphised: Paley fact” – this goes against logical reasoning. 5. Russell: the universe exists as a “Brute Fact” undermines the belief in a divine explains the world from the perspective of his 6. There could be many caused necessary and is unexplainable. creator could be solved through a human experience, when the world should not beings, but these should still be contingent 6. Why can’t there be a group of necessary theodicy, e.g. Augustine or Vale of be explained in this way. on one uncaused necessary being, which beings, not just one? - 7. Soul Making. The universe could have developed by exists in and of itself. Why could there not be a group of chance. 7. Occam’s Razor: one uncaused being makes uncaused necessary beings? fewer assumptions than many. 8. Why can’t the universe itself be eternal and 8. No scientific theories explain why there is uncaused: e.g. the universe has already something other than nothing (Ex Nihilo Nihil existed and the big bang created the world Fit). There is still the need for a necessary inside it. Strengths of the Ontological Argument. Weaknesses of the Ontological Argument. being that can exist so everything else can - It does not rely on unreliable synthetic -Kant – existence is not a predicate, because the exist. Practice Questions: propositions. concept of “existence” tells us nothing new about A01: - It uses the same rational process as the subject, God. If someone shouted “it exists!” 1. Examine how the Design Argument seeks to prove the existence of God. mathematics, which people accept as we cannot know what “it is”. 2. Examine Anselm’s argument for God’s existence, with reference to the definition of God as the true. -- In the same way, saying that a coin called a Thaler greatest conceivable being. exists tells us nothing about it, only describing the - Anselm responds to criticisms with 3. Examine the different approaches take to explaining the existence of God in the Cosmological coin tells us about it. counter-arguments, making it and Design argument. -Kant – logical truth does not have to be true, saying stronger. “a unicorn is a white horse with a horn” is true by 4. Examine how Aquinas’ Cosmological Argument helps people to have faith in God.

PHILOSOPHY - It can be supported by fideism. definition, but it does not mean that unicorns exist. A02: In the same way, saying “God is the greatest 1. “The existence of God cannot be proven” assess this statement (40) conceivable being” does not mean he has to exist. 2. “The Design Argument is the best explanation for the existence of God.” Assess this statement (40) 3. “The strengths of the Ontological Argument outweigh the weaknesses.” Assess this statement. (40) 4. “Aquinas has prove the existence of God through the Cosmological Argument.” Assess this statement (40).

235 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Ethics Natural Moral Law Knowledge Organiser

Key words Basic Premises of the Deontological/Catholic theory: The Principle of Double Effect • Thomas Aquinas, C13th Italian priest – based his work on the philosophy of Aristotle, Aquinas calls Aquinas did accept that there were times when people could • Reason – The God-given ability to cognitively process the Aristotle “the philosopher” in the Summa Theologica. follow the law but this would still result in an action that the difference between right and wrong. • The theory is deontological, meaning that the rules of the theory are fixed, and actions are seen as precept would view as being bad. Examples are when a medical being intrinsically right or wrong. “Deon” means “duty” in Greek – this means that deontological action must be taken to save a pregnant woman’s life, or when theories tell you what your duties are. military measures must be taken to preserve innocent life. PHILOSOPHY • Divine Law – God’s Law, as recorded in the Scriptures • Synderesis principle: act I a way that does good and avoids evil/ Sometimes, these scenarios may lead to death (e.g. of the embryo and preserved in Church tradition. • This can be understood through reason. or civillians accidentally caught in the crossfire), however as long • As a Roman Catholic, Thomas Aquinas believed in the authority of the Church and the Bible, this as the first action was good according to the precepts it is still meant that laws in the Bible and laws made by the Catholic Church cannot be broken. acceptable according to Aquinas. • Natural Moral Law – the Law that all humans can • The aim for all humans, according to Aquinas, is to reach Eudaimonia (ultimate happiness through Strengths and Weaknesses of Double Effect understand through their application of reason (primary union with God – this is possible by following Natural Moral Law (the law that is revealed to use by Strengths: Some people feel that Double Effect makes Natural and secondary precepts). reason. Moral Law a better way of making moral decisions because it • “natural” behaviour (following God’s order in creation) is the moral way to behave. allows people to adapt to extreme circumstances. It resolves some of the problems of deontology: if an action is • Eudaimonia – Ultimate happiness through union with Primary and Secondary Precepts: always right or wrong it may cause people to do things which God. Aquinas argued that through application of reason all people could understand the same five primary cause harm to others. precepts, which act as general guidelines for behaviour that follow the Synderesis Principle. These People can respond to extreme circumstances by acting in a way are: that has a good intention and a bad secondary consequence. • Double Effect – when someone does an action which the 1. Act in a way that preserves the self and innocent life. precepts defines as good, but a secondary result of this 2. Reproduce and have children. Weaknesses: However, other people argue that it doesn’t matter 3. Educate children. what the intention was, if a bad consequence comes about then action breaks the precept, it is still acceptable as the first 4. Worship God. the action is still morally wrong. action had the intention of following the law. (e.g. 5. Live in a ordered society. People who argue that the consequences of an action show if it is right and wrong reject Double Effect because the bad removing a fallopian tube that contains an ectopic From these five precepts, Aquinas argued that specific rules could be discerned through applying consequence still happened. pregnancy, firstly saving the mother’s life, secondly human reason, therefore, these guidelines become deontological rules that cannot be broke. For There is also a problem in judging the ‘intention’ of an action: no resulting the death of the baby). example, the precept to preserve life makes actions such as killing and abortion wrong, and the one knows if someone’s intention really is good or bad – their precept to reproduce makes homosexuality wrong, as it implies that the only use for sex should be intention may be to bring about the bad effect the whole time. reproduction of children. • Manualism – C17th creation of manuals (large books) of secondary precepts. Proportionalism: Other Responses: Manualism • Proportionalism – C20th movement following the Created by Bernard Hoose and Richard McCormick in the C20th, Proportionalism agrees with the Synderesis Principle and thinks that the Primary Precepts form the principles of NML but also considering the consequences C17th Catholic movement where secondary precepts were of an action, prioritising a compassionate outcome. framework for ethics. However, these scholars accept that at times NML can lead compiled in “manuals” – huge books with lists of specific rules. to unloving circumstances because of its hard-line deontological approach, This had the effect of making ML more deontological, as there therefore they have suggested that it is right to occasionally break laws to allow for are more specific rules to follow. It also provided wider • Ontic Goods – qualities that are in themselves non-moral guidance on specific ethical issues. but help to make moral decisions in Proportionalism. the most loving outcome. In order to know when it is appropriate to do this, they recommend using ‘ontic goods’ such as love, justice and charity to guide moral behaviour.

236 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Strengths of Natural Moral Law Weaknesses of Natural Moral Law For Abortion: For Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide: For Capital Punishment: - To save the life of the mother in the case - Pain killing drugs may be administered - Aquinas is in favour of CP as it It helps people to establish rules that everyone can follow in every Reason does not seem to be universal - Other cultures have very of Double Effect. to someone which have the accidental maintains order and justice in society, society. different standards: e.g. in some Inuit and Native American cultures secondary effect of ending their life meeting the primary precept. It is a universal system because it relies on reason that everyone has. the old/young that cannot make it through the winter are killed or Against Abortion: (this could be considered ‘Passive - CP is allowed in the Bible – “an eye for The precepts are also commonly accepted by everyone: everyone left to die. - Life begins at conception (Divine Law) Euthanasia’). an eye. A life for a life.” wants to preserve life, live in society, etc. It is outdated: e.g. in today’s society, a moral system that argues that - Preserve life is a primary precept. - The precept to preserve life only Supports human rights and equality which are important in today’s it is ‘unnatural’ to be a homosexual is disregarded. - Do not kill is a secondary precept. Against Euthanasia/ AS: depends on preserving innocent life, society. Not everyone believes in God which poses a big problem to NML. - Catholic tradition teaches that abortion - Self preservation is a primary precept. and those who are convicted of a It allows people to be moral and stand firm on issues. Peter Vardy and Paul Grosch have criticised how Aquinas jumps from is always wrong. - Divine law outlaws suicide. capital crime are not innocent. Secondary precepts are a day-to-day guide on what is right or wrong. the primary precepts to the secondary precepts: although sexual acts - Catholic tradition views suicide as an - CP was used in 13th Century Italy so was It is related to human nature and how humans think and feel. are important to continue the human species, it is unnecessary for unforgivable sin. part of his context. every emission of semen to be for procreative purposes, even if people masturbate occasionally the human species can still be Against Capital Punishment: continued. - Precept to preserve life. Aquinas could have got some of his assumptions wrong: e.g. sexual organs could be primarily for pleasure and secondly for procreating. For Embryo Research: For Designer Babies: Cloning: Aquinas’ account of the human nature is too simplistic: now that we - can be used to preserve life, e.g. through - Can be used to preserve life –e.g. making - Therapeutic cloning can be used to create have advances in science and psychology we know that it is much eradicating genetic diseases – this is the a “saviour sibling.” This could even be stem cells which can be used to help treat more complex than he suggested. Synderesis principle. argued from the perspective of Double fatal diseases such as leukaemia. Theft and Lying: Effect. Theft and lying are wrong because: Against Cloning: Goes against the primary precept “live in society”. Against Embryo Research: Against Designer Babies: - It is wrong to play God, this goes Goes against the secondary precept in the 10 commandments (Exodus 20): Do not steal & lie. - Life begins at conception, so the - It is wrong to play God, this goes against the primary precept worship Is outlawed in Divine Law as it is in the Bible. embryo is considered to be a fully against the primary precept worship God. The theory is deontological so it is never right to do something immoral even for a good reason (so stealing/lying to help others is wrong). human person. God. - Reproduction should be natural. Aquinas argues that theft/lying is always wrong in the Summa Theologica. - Any research that discards embryos is - Reproduction should be natural. - Any cloning that destroys embryos is murder. - It would be wrong to raise a child murder because life begins at Exceptions: - Reproduction should be natural (no thinking it is special as it has been conception. Theft: Aquinas argues that in cases of extreme need (e.g. one is starving to death) the act of taking food that belongs to someone else would IVF). designed, going against the primary not be classed as theft. This is because the food becomes the property of the person in need, not the person who has enough. This is only the precept to educate children. case in life-threatening situations – it is not theft “properly speaking” because in taking something to preserve life, “the property becomes yours by reason of that need.” Practice Questions: Bullet point plan your answers in your book Lying: There are some lies that Aquinas would argue are non-malicious and not immoral: An example of a lie that is not a sin is the lie that the midwives of Egypt told: (Exodus) they allowed baby boys to live after the Pharaoh ordered the death of every first born of the Jewish A01: children. They told the Pharaoh that the boys were killed, but not all were. In this case, God rewarded the midwives so Aquinas argues that the 1. Examine the theory of Natural Moral Law with reference to Aquinas action cannot be wrong, as God “does not reward sin.” However, if one has to lie to save a life, Aquinas suggested that the best course of 2. Examine conclusions that followers of Natural Moral Law may reach on the issue of abortion. action is to “keep back the truth” rather than directly lie. However, a malicious lie is always wrong. 3. Examine Manualism and Proportionalism in relation to Natural Moral Law The Attitude of Natural Moral Law to Animal Rights A02: Aquinas agrees with Aristotle who sees creation as containing a “hierarchy of souls” – with plants at the bottom 1. “Natural Moral Law is an ineffective moral theory.” Evaluate this statement (40)

PHILOSOPHY and humans at the top. Humans are above animals in the hierarchy, as they are the only ones with the ability to 2. “Natural Moral Law does not offer effective guidance on issues of animal life and death.” reason. Aquinas, in the Summa Theologica, argues that animals are “things” that can be used to help humans reach Eudaimonia. Evaluate this statement (40) Due to his context, the above view, and his Catholic background (which suggests that theory of dominion – that 3. “Followers of Natural Moral Law cannot support euthanasia” Evaluate this statement. (40) God placed humans above animals in creation, meaning that they can use them for their purposes) it is likely that Aquinas would allow animals to be used in most ways to support humans – even blood sports, as this was a common past time in his context. However, due to his emphasis on things being “natural”, it does mean that Aquinas may not support more scientific uses of animals, such as using them in organ transplants for humans, as this goes against God’s intended Natural Moral Law:A02 order for creation. 237 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Ethics Bentham & Kant Knowledge Organiser Bentham’s Ethics: Act Utilitarianism Kant’s Ethics: Bentham’s context: Social Reformer (C18th-19th England). He recognised that there were many social problems in society created by Kant’s context: Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is considered the most influential thinker of the Enlightenment era and one of the imbalance between rich and poor. He saw the suffering of people living in city slums in England, whilst the intellectual rich were thriving. He greatest Western philosophers of all times. Studied mathematics but later became a Doctor of Philosophy at the university of therefore dedicated his life to trying to resolve this imbalance, and is an important figure within political and moral philosophy. For example, Konisberg (Germany), where he taught until his death. He grew up in the sect of Protestant Pietism but his ethics are known for he is known for designing the ‘Panopticon’ – a revolutionary prison in a star shape where prisoners could be watched over by one guard. being largely secular. Atheism: Bentham was an atheist who saw religion as actually preventing morality, therefore he created a theory that does not rely on God Focus on rationality: Kant’s philosophy is often described as the golden middle between rationalism and empiricism. He didn’t at all, but instead focuses on a human ability to reason. accept either of both views but he gave credit to both. Kant argued that experience must be processed by pure reason and this is PHILOSOPHY Hedonism: Bentham argued that humans are slaves to two “sovereign masters” – pleasure and pain. He looked at humans and recognised how humans behave morally. that in everything we do, we act naturally to avoid pain and gain pleasure. In his life, he therefore focused on what brought him the most pleasure and recommended that others do the same. What the “summum bonum” is: The only thing that can be intrinsically good is being perfectly rational – this is the “ultimate good” (summum bonum). Humans can achieve the summum bonum by being perfectly rational. All humans have a duty to follow How “good” and “bad” are defined: Bentham is an “Ethical Naturalist” meaning that he sees good and bad as naturally occurring in the moral law, which is to do actions with a completely rational principle behind them. material world (they are “natural properties). Therefore, morally good actions are ones that bring about pleasure, and morally bad actions are ones that bring about pain. How the theory is deontological: Kant argued that through human reason we can understand what our moral duties are, this creates deontological rules that must be followed in all circumstances – regardless of intention, which is often emotional and The Utility Principle: Act in a way that produces the greatest pleasure for the greatest number of people (this is democratic in nature). irrational. Definition of “Categorical Imperative”: An unconditional requirement that must be obeyed in all circumstances and is justified as What the Hedonic Calculus is: literally a “Pleasure calculator” – a set of principles that are designed to help people consider which action an end in itself. brings about the greatest pleasure for the majority. Whilst this is fairly cumbersome to use on an individual basis, it is particularly helpful as a system of government, and it is important to remember that as a social reformer, Bentham was not just thinking about how individuals make more decisions, but how whole governments could consider which actions bring about good for the majority. 3 forms of the Categorical Imperative with explanation:

The principles with explanation: 1. “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can will that it should become a universal law.” 1. Intensity: stronger happiness is better than weaker This means that in all cases, it must be logically possible for all people to carry out the rule behind your action, in all 2. Duration: longer lasting pleasure is better than brief circumstances. If the action is shown to be illogical when it is universalized, this is known as a “contradiction in conception.” 3. Certainty: An act that will definitely produce pleasure is better than one which only possibly produces pleasure 2. Do not treat humans as means to an end, but as ends in themselves. 4. Propinquity/Remoteness: the more immediate in space or time the anticipated pleasure, the more relevant it should be to the This means that it is always wrong to use or harm humans in the way that we behave, so any action that does this is unacceptable. decision 3.” …every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of 5. Fecundity/Production: a pleasure that leads to more pleasure is of greater value than a pleasure that does not lead to more, ends.” similarly a pain that leads to more pain is worse than a pain with no painful after effects This means that all beings must consider how their actions benefit society, not just themselves as an individual. This is 6. Purity: A pleasure with no pain mixed in, is the greatest pleasure. unconditional in nature, and the way that God (a perfectly rational being) behaves. 7. Extent: the more people sharing the pleasure, the better What a “good will” is: A good will = wanting to follow the law. How the theory is teleological: This is teleological in nature, as one must consider the consequences of an action to determine its morality. There are therefore NO MORAL ABSOLUTES, and what brings about the best for the majority in one situation will not necessarily be the same in another situation. Kant’s view of God and angels: God and the angels do exist, but as perfectly rational beings. This is an adaptation of Classical Theism. How J.S. Mill adapted Bentham’s Utilitarianism (Rule Utilitarianism): Noumenal realm: the spiritual realm where beings are perfectly rational – humans can inhabit this when they display perfect Mill recongised that there were issues with Bentham’s system of morality – particularly that it could lead to the exploitation of minorities in reason. order to benefit the majority, however he did agree with the Utility Principle. In order to overcome the issues of Bentham’s theory, he Phenomenal realm: the materialistic realm of pleasure and pain, animals inhabit this realm, and humans can too when they are suggested the addition of some rules to safeguard against problems, creating a hybrid theory, that still focuses on maximising pleasure, but being emotional and irrational. also maintains laws and order in society. An example of a rule that helps this is that stealing and murder are wrong and should be avoided What humans should aim for: Humans should not be side-tracked by ‘feeling’ or ‘intuition’- obeying the moral law is always the wherever possible. right decision and our duty. Kant believed humans seek a supreme good or ‘summum bonum’ in which human virtues and happiness are equal- this is achieved by completing our moral duty but is not achievable on one lifetime so the human soul must Higher and lower pleasures: be immortal. Kant therefore accepted the existence of an afterlife and existence of God. Mill was also concerned that Bentham’s theory was a little animalistic because of its focus on human pleasure. He commented that “it is Kant’s view of the moral responsibility of humans: All humans are responsible for action in a rational way – they must seek to better the be Socrates unsatisfied than a pig satisfied”, and suggested that it is better to pursue “Intellectual” pleasures such as reading and overcome their phenomenal intuition and focus on the “summum bonum” of being perfectly rational. enjoying classical music over lower pleasures such as sex and overeating. He therefore sought to refine Bentham’s theory to give more guidance about what sort of pleasures are acceptable. 238 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Similarities between Kantian decision Differences between Kantian decision How Utilitarian's make decisions: How religious people make decisions: making and religious decision making: making and religious decision making: • Consider the “Principle of Utility”. • Consider religious guidelines, e.g. Scripture, Traditional Laws (such as those • According to Kant, the most • Kant did not simply justify the existence • Consult the Hedonic Calculus. contained in the Bible) DCT. of the God of Classical Theism – Jesus is compelling historical modal of • Reflect on their own experiences and the experiences that history has • Pray for guidance. moral behavior is Jesus of not necessarily the son of God, and God taught us to help them understand the possible consequences of their • Reflect on their own experiences and the experiences of others from history himself is explained through rational Nazareth, for he is said to have actions. and within their religion. principles, not seen as an ineffable resisted all temptations – this is • Use their ability to reason. • Use their ability to reason (NML), follow primary and secondary precepts. mystery as many Christians would argue • Weigh up what the best option is and choose that outcome • Consider the agapeic action (SE). like SE that sees Jesus as a He is. • Follow the religious law because it is their duty. role model. • Kant is known for criticising arguments • Kant thinks the best way to for God such as Anselm’s Ontological Utilitarianism Vs Kantian Ethics promote ethical laws is through Argument. the "church invisible." The • Kant’s focus on being perfectly rational is Similarities: Differences: not the same as Classical Theism’s focus • Both ethics can function in a secular society – Kant because humans have total • Teleological VS deontological. invisible church is universal; it on following God’s laws (DCT/NML) or moral responsibility, and Bentham because he focuses on hedonism over • Kant does believe in the existence of God and angels whereas Bentham does applies equally to everyone – following the example of Jesus to show religion. not. showing that he is pro agape love (SE). • Both ethics support the aims of democracy – Bentham because he searches • Bentham aims for pleasure whereas Kant aims for reason. religious structures and • SE would be seen as being too for the greatest good for the greatest number, and Kant because of • Kant – actions are always wrong. Bentham – no moral absolutes. emotional and irrational due to its universalizability and the Kingdom of Ends. • Kant does not use humans as a means to an end as the categorical imperative authorities. Both have similar contexts – moral philosophers working for the good of must respect human life. Bentham would find it acceptable to harm a minority teleological nature and focus on love. • • Kant says that it is not necessary society. group. to believe that Jesus was the son • Both support maximising good for humans above all else. • Kant uses principle of the categorical imperative whereas Bentham uses the 7 of God, but it is important to point Hedonic Calculus. believe in the possibility that • Bentham – a good will = pleasure. Kant – a good will = following the law. Jesus actually attained moral perfection – sees Jesus as a Strengths of Kant Weaknesses of Kant Strengths of Bentham Weaknesses of Bentham moral teacher. • Kant argued that God did exist as • Straightforward as based on • It is inflexible and unloving. • Secular so applies to everyone. • Could lead to the creation of a a perfectly rational being. reason and one categorical • It is unrealistic to require • It reflects human nature: we “slave culture” as it is Sources of authority used in religious decision making (to be compared with Kant/Bentham): imperative. humans to be completely can see that pleasure brings acceptable to use the minority •Scripture Kant provides – e.g. the Biblea deontological – which contains both deontological rules and illustrative stories of religious • • Deontological nature makes it rational and unemotional, we about good consequences. to benefit the majority. roleframework models to influencethat is not morality dissimilar (e.g. narratives to of the life of Jesus). easy to apply as there are have familiar obligations that • It is democratic so it works • Seen as basic and animalistic Church/religious tradition – particularly relevant for the Catholic Church which accepts “dual source” • DCT/NML. absolute rules. we cannot ignore. within contemporary society. to prioritise pleasure. tradition – seeing both scriptures and the teachings of the Catholic Church as coming directly from God • It is egalitarian as everyone • Depends to an extend on • There is a framework which • It is impossible to predict the (texts such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church and Summa Theologica therefore also have must be treated well due to the supernatural and unverifiable helps people to apply the future so we can never know authority). “lawmaker in a kingdom of phenomena, like Gods and principle of utility. which action is the best. The guidance of the Holy Spirit and Divine revelation (can be through religious experience). • ends” formulation. angels/the noumenal realm. • Mill’s addition of rules makes it • Does not apply to religious Advice from religious leaders and other practitioners. • • Does not treat humans as a more acceptable. people. intuition./instinct and conscience. • means to an end • Any action is permissible –

PHILOSOPHY Theories that are religious in nature: (andro-centric). even abhorrent ones like rape, - Divine Command Theories – right is what God commands and wrong is what God forbids. genocide, as there are no - NML – from Aquinas, deontological Catholic moral theory. moral absolutes. - SE – Fletcher’s teleological theory focusing on maximising agape love. Practise Questions: Bullet point plan your answers as an optional extension: A01: 1. Examine the differences between Bentham’s ethics and religious ways of moral decision making. 2. Examine Kant’s Categorical Imperative with reference to the principle of universalizability. 3. Examine the differences between Bentham’s ethics and Kant’s ethics. A02: 1. “Religion gives a more coherent method of moral decision making than Kantian ethics.” Evaluate this statement (40) Bentham and Kant A02 2. “it is possible to be both Kantian and Utilitarian at the same time.” Evaluate this statement (40) 239 3. “Religious ways of moral decision making have undermined Kant’s Categorical Imperative.” Evaluate this statement. (40) Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Visions - A vision is something seen in a dream, trance, or religious Numinous Experiences – refer to experiences where the power and Mystical Experiences – experiences of the mystical power of God, ecstasy, especially a supernatural appearance that usually conveys a presence of the divine is felt. where one loses oneself and unites with a divine power. revelation.

Corporeal: Intro: This is a special term that has come to refer to experiences of awe Intro: It may refer to any kind of ecstasy or altered state of consciousness which is Comes from a sense of sight. and wonder that are believed to come from a supernatural being. given a religious or spiritual meaning. It may also refer to the attainment of insight in In a corporeal vision, a person will see and object that has religious experience clearly, •It comes from ‘numen’ = to bow the head ultimate or hidden truths, and to human transformation supported by various practices in the same way that they can see any other object around them. •Often, these experiences put human experience into “perspective” – and experiences – such as Buddhist nirvana. Mysticism is, by nature, mysterious. This is a reality view, as an Angel, God or religious figure such as a Saint is believed to meaning that they make humans aware that in the grand scheme of God’s Mysticisms is seen as a spiritual practice that many different religions try to perfect really be appearing within the world in order to give a specific message, or personally plan, they are very small. Becoming aware of the power of God gives over their lifetimes. prove to an individual that God exists. humans a sense of their own nothingness and powerlessness in the They can be described as “empirical” in nature – this means that they are experienced Walter Stace (1886-1967) - “Either God is a mystery or He is nothing at PHILOSOPHY by the senses of touch, taste, hearing, smell and sight. This is a realist perspective, as universe. all.” the belief is that the vision is really affecting a person’s physical being. •Such experiences are key to understanding the spirituality of many Religious experiences are mystical, he argues that God must be a mystery Example: In C15th, Joan of Arc claimed that she saw real visions of saints with her “bodily eyes” – religions. to humanity as otherwise he would not be an omnipotent, transcendent God these saints appeared to her in the same way that any other object did. They told her to fight for •Most of the experiences we have discussed already have “numinous” that is worthy of worship. This is shown in the quote “Either God is a French independence, and led her to lead a revolution against the British in the Hundred Years War, aspects – for example the intellectual vision that St Teresa of Avila had – which was won by the French. mystery, or he is nothing at all.” – if we did understand God, we ourselves St Bernadette saw visions of the Virgin Mary in Lourdes, France. These vision opened a spring of this gave her a feeling of amazement, that the light of Jesus was with her. would have to be omniscient, omnipotent beings. To understand God and water said the have healing properties (approx. 70 healing miracles have taken place there since, Biblical evidence:Moses and the Burning Bush: his nature, and to be able to completely understanding a religious and it is a place of pilgrimage). Exodus 3:3-6 discusses Moses’ encounter with the Holy through the burning experience in a realist way, we would have to ourselves be omniscient bush. Moses was completely overwhelmed by the experience and hid his Imaginative: beings. This is because only God can understand God, humans are on a face from the power of God. The ground around where God appeared is lower level. He therefore rejects visions, as these are experiences that Occur most frequently in dreams. described as “Holy ground”, and Moses is instructed to take off his shoes to In this type of vision, the person experiencing it has no control – showing that people seem to be able to understand. show ritual respect to God in this space. He defines mystical experiences as non-sensuous and non-intellectual this vision comes from God. This vision is seen in the mind. God is ineffable – he cannot describe who he is beyond “I am the I am” – Despite occurring in the mind, these visions have real effects of the people meaning that they do not involve the physical senses, and that when we Moses feels fear and is motivated to follow God by doing what he says. have them we lose our sense of self (the “I” consciousness) in favour of a who receive them, making them change their behaviour. They can therefore God is ineffable and beyond human language: be understood in both a realist and anti-realist way. higher power. Often the word “holy” is repeated 3 times in Old Testament passages, this He rejected many experiences that could be “mystical”, such as visions, Example: Genesis 41 – the Pharaoh dreams 7 thin cows eat 7 fat cows, and 7 withered stalks of emphasises the importance of God’s holiness, it is a literary device that corn devour 7 healthy stalks. Pharaoh understands that this dream is significant, leading him to ask voices and the powers of the occult- all of these rely on the senses. Joseph to interpret it for him. Joseph correctly tells him that there will be a famine in 7 years time and emphasises God’s transcendent nature. E.g. Isaiah 6:3 “Holy, holy holy is Visions are not mystical because they are sensuous, and the definition of to prepare for it. the Lord of hosts…” The only way that the greatness of God can even begin mystical is non-sensuous, specifically having no shape, form or colour. Joseph’s dream – Matthew 2. An angel appears to Joseph in a dream and tells him to take Mary and to be communicated is through repetition of this phrase, which means Jesus to Egypt, as Herod is planning to kill infant Jesus. Mystical experiences can be introvertive or extrovertive, meaning the completely special and set apart. experiencer loses their sense of self, accepting a higher power or being (in the case of an introvertive experience) or keeping your sense of self but Religious Experiences A01 being made aware of the existence of a higher power (in the case of extrovertive).

Intellectual: Rudolph Otto: William James (Varieties of Religious Experience 1902) believed that mystical Have no image to be perceived. Otto argued that all religious experiences are numinous – “relating to the experiences consist of four distinguishing features. power (or presence) of a deity.” There are mystical in nature – meaning they are hard to understand and have their However, they give people an awareness of how things really are/the Numinous experiences often involve feelings of awe and wonder, but these can also origin in a higher power that takes over. true nature of the world. be related to fear – people feel frightened by the unknown and by being made aware • They are ineffable, that is they can not adequately be described by the People experience an “illumination” of the soul and proof that God of the power of God being so much bigger than themselves. human language. exists. They are described as “sui generis” – unique or in a class of their own. • They are noetic; they convey some knowledge of the universe. Religious experiences are an experience of God as the wholly other. Showing people • They are transient - they do not last long and may only happen once in a life This is a type of mystical experience, so cannot be described in that God is different from anything else in the universe and the realms of human time – showing that God is transcendent (outside of space and time). human words. experience. These feelings are also beyond human reason, so they cannot be • They are also passive; the person has no control over them. Example: St Teresa of Avila: whilst in prayer, got a sense that Jesus was beside her, explained rationally, or put into human words. This relates to the concept of In all religious experiences James identifies a feeling of deep inner peace, joy, great comforting her, allowing her to draw on his presence whenever she needed to. “I saw ineffability. emotional intensity and an unshakeable claim that God has been encountered in a nothing with the eyes if the body… I had the most distinct feeling of His near presence.” These experiences always show that God is transcendent: beyond space and time. “bipolar event.” (Beyond human control and understanding. Teresa describes a “light” of understanding, and the fact that she “just knew” that God Friedrich Schleiermacher: These experiences could be used to prove religions other than the Classically Theist was with her. her soul was conveyed the clear knowledge of Jesus’ presence. Religious experiences are primarily emotional and that every person has a ones – such as Buddhism – the experience of nirvana for example could be Mother Julian of Norwich: Had a mystical experience where she felt a “cloud of consciousness of the divine. understood through his 4 criteria. unknowing” descended on her, revealing to her the true extend of God’s greatness in These emotions are deeper than reason and are ‘self-authenticating;’ – this means These feelings can be brought about in ways other than prayer and worship – for 240 comparison to her. Whilst it was ineffable, it transformed her life and she dedicated the that they do not require testing to be seen as genuine. example, they could in his opinion be brought about whilst under the influence of rest of her life to trying to reflect on and understand this experience. They are an awareness of a dependence on a ‘source of power that is distinct from hallucinogenic drugs. Aspiration Creativitythe world’ Character that is at the heart of religion. KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Philosophy Religious Experiences Knowledge Organiser: A02 There is no set definition of a religious experience, although generally these are said to convey some knowledge of God. Religious experiences can be interpreted in both realist and anti-realist ways. Realist interpretations focus on experiences that are believed to really occur in the world, such as seeing visions and hearing voices. By comparison, anti-realist approaches would accept visions that occur in the mind and personally effect people, but may not refer to a “real” event that can actually be empirically verified. All Christians believe in the possibility of experiencing God in their lives, and believe in scriptural testimony regarding God causing people to experience him. Without religious experiences, the world religions of today would not exist. Every religion depends on some sort of religious and/or spiritual experience. How religious believers maintain their faith in God despite scientific criticisms Strengths of Visions Weaknesses of Visions Strengths of Numinous Weaknesses of Strengths of Mysticism Weaknesses of Swinburne’s starting point is that belief in God is reasonably possible, based on all of the Numinous Mysticism classic arguments for God (Ontological, Moral, Cosmological, design etc.). Based on this he • Can be • Non-verifiable as • Can be understood • It is not clear if this • Support from world • These experiences states understood in a they are not in anti-realist way, feeling is caused religions who are by nature Richard 1. The principle of credulity. Something should be accepted unless there are good realist way, universal, there is overcoming many by God, as this is a believe that it is mysterious and Swinburne which means no vision that of the issues of subjective and possible to lose cannot be grounds for thinking it may be mistaken – i.e. falsification rather than verification that they show everyone has. verifiability – rather personal one’s sense of self understood in a 2. The principle of testimony. We should believe what people say unless we have good God really acting • Hick “epistemic than something experience. We and experience relist way. grounds for doubting someone. in the world. distance” is happening in the cannot verify the God. • Hume/Occam’s • They can also undermined if God world, it refers to a source of it, and • Does not attempt Razor: there are Swinburne is the best example of a Realist. be understood in and holy beings do personal this source could to limit God in more likely In the chapter on Philosophy, James rejects all the traditional arguments for God. an anti-realist appear in the experience. easily be human language, explanations for In mysticism there is an ‘eternal unanimity’ i.e. they are all the same. The existence of way, overcoming world. • Evidence from the environmental upholding the these feelings that different religions and beliefs is good as it reflects different personalities. the issue of • Why do visions Bible to convince rather than logical framework God being involved realist miracles only occur for classical theists – supernatural/God. of classical theism. in the world. There Religious experiences are different to ordinary experiences and form an identifiable being hard to some and no e.g. Moses saw the • Occam’s Razor: • James gives a could be category. verify. others? burning bush. not necessarily the clear framework for environmental In his conclusion to the chapter on Mysticism, he states: • They are clearly • They could be a • Clearly have an most likely identifying religious factors like TLE powerful hoax, lie, impact on people’s explanation. experiences with and drugs 1. Mystical states are absolutely authoritative to those that have them because of how misunderstanding lives so are • If God is ineffable, his 4 criteria, involved. 2. No authority extends to people who have not had them they change or trick of the light personally how can making it easy to • James accepts 3. They break down the authority of rational empiricism, showing that there are other lives – e.g. – Occam’s Razor, meaningful. knowledge of him understand. drugs as causing Mother Julian of is a religious vision be conveyed to us religious forms of consciousness ‘other orders of truth’ Norwich. the most likely at all? experiences when James is a Realist of sorts, but calls himself a Pragmatist : ‘to develop a thought’s meaning explanation? • Why don’t all these experiences William we need therefore only determine what conduct it is fitted to produce’, so we can people have these are clearly caused James experiences? by hallucinogenic detect the reality of an experience by what is seen and/or reported. He is not as Challenges to religious experience from science: Verification and Falsification principle - Science would seek to verify and/or falsifysubstances. a claim. much of a realist as Swinburne. Logical Positivism upholds scientific investigation and empiricism as the only acceptable forms of truth. They take a realist approach to religious experience and argue that He rejects the idea that ‘Medical Materialism’ explains away religious experience. they must be proven in reality to be known. ‘Medical materialism finishes up Saint Paul by calling his vision on the road to Damascus a discharging lesion of the occipital cortex, he being an epileptic. It snuffs Freud was a materialist. ∙ out Saint Teresa as an hysteric’. All thoughts and feelings are organically founded. Religion is a psychological illness – a neurosis. ∙ We should note them but not explain away their products.

PHILOSOPHY Religious people seek a father figure because of the Oedipus Complex and God fulfils that imaginary role. Freud ∙ For James, insight comes from religious experiences that convinces the experiencer that The aim of psychoanalysis was to outgrow religious belief ∙ a higher power exists. This is like Fideism (although James is not a fideist) – the Religious experience is illusory wish fulfilment – fantasy ∙ Teresa of Avila’s experience of the dart of love would be seen by a Freudian as the product of repressed sexuality. experience does not need any more evidence, and from then on the experiencer ∙ A01: Examine the followingcan rely types on faith of religious alone. experience: visions/numinous experiences/mystical experiences. Did experiments to discover that patients with temporal lobe epilepsy are far more prone to religious experiences, so the temporal lobe is a Examine scientific criticisms of religious experiences Ramachandran particular focus for these experiences. This shows that religious experiences may be caused in the brain alone, and they are not caused by an Examine how religious believers respond to scientific criticisms of religious experiences. external factor like God or the Holy Spirit. A02: “Religious experiences are reasonable.” Evaluate this claim [40 marks]. “Religious experiences prove God exists.” Assess this view [40 marks]. Religious experiences are no more than the brain reacting to external stimuli. He developed a helmet with weak magnetic fields which induces “Science has made it impossible to believe in the credibility of religious experiences.” Assess this statement [40 Persinger an experience similar to religious experience. Tibetan monks practised in meditation certainly thought the ‘God helmet’ did produce a similar marks]. feel – this again shows that the brain alone can be stimulated to recreate the feelings of religious experience. 241 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Philosophy Miracles Knowledge Organiser

Realist view of miracles held by believers: Anti-realist views of miracles: Anti-Realism = denies that we can have knowledge of a mind-independent world, as we interpret the world • Realism accepts that science can give humans a true description of the world, and that the world is mind-independent (i.e. that it around us through our minds and thus the interpretations are subjective and not meaningful. From an A-R perspective, it is impossible to will exist the way it is, regardless of what humans think about it.) meaningfully discuss God because he is unobservable. • This is not just a scientific viewpoint, it is also a religious one – religious believers may take a realist view of God and his behaviour in Therefore, discussions of miracles cannot refer to events that actually happened and can be historically verified. This is because the mind is the world, and realists would suggest that God really acts in the world, and these actions can be witnessed and understood by subjective and how we interpret the world. humans when they do occur. Miracles do occur, but they occur “In the mind”. They are mental states that are understood psychologically and sociologically. REAL = we can really understand the nature of the world. Therefore we can really understand and discuss miracles when they happen.. Miracles lift the spirit, or transform a community of people. 1. Miracles are a real part of what happens in the world. Therefore, the resurrection of Jesus can be understood as a miracle because the narrative has transformed Christians worldwide, who believe

2. Miracles are brought about by God or a spiritual force (and are evidence of God’s existence). in salvation and atonement as a result of it. PHILOSOPHY 3. The above 2 statements are true despite the fact that it is impossible for humans to understand everything about miracles. anti-realist religious scholars are likely to suggest that meaning in religion comes from the impact on the self, rather than God intervening in the universe from outside it. Types of realist miracles, with examples: miracles can be understood in 3 different ways, some of which overlap. ANTI-REAL = we cannot understand the nature of the world. Therefore we also cannot understand and discuss miracles. 1. Miracles of beneficial coincidence: R.F. Holland: This refers to when an event happens, apparently by chance, that proves the existence of a supernatural being. The events can be confirmed Holland takes an anti real approach to miracles historically. • Holland defines a miracle as: One famous example is of Juliane Koepcke, who in 1971 was on a flight that crashed into the Peruvian rainforest after encountering a • “A remarkable & beneficial coincidence that is interpreted in a religious fashion” thunderstorm. The plan fell 10,000 feet and crashed, killing 91/92 people on board. Juliane was the sole survivor but had many injuries (such as Holland’s example is that of a child on a railway crossing – in the story a child playing on the tracks gets stuck, & an express train on the broken bones and cuts that become infested with maggots) – she survived a 9 day trek through the jungle to reach help. Juliane’s example is • tracks is not due to stop & cannot see the child to stop in time. The mother emerges from her house without enough time to save her seen as a miracle brought about by God, and is labelled as a miracle of chance because of the extreme odds against her survival. child, but by chance the train stops just before hitting the boy. The mother thanks God for the miracle which has occurred. Problems with this view: Because the mother interpreted it in a religious fashion, it is a miracle. This realist definition of a miracle is limited, it only describes the event (an amazing coincidence), not God’s involvement in it. The • Maurice Wiles: interpretation of this event as a “Miracle” comes from external sources – in Peru, Christians believed that Juliane’s experience proved that God A realist view of miracles, that they really happen and we can actively understand them, is unacceptable. Instead, it is necessary to take was with her. • an anti-realist stance on miracles – he asks what so-called miraculous events reveal about God’s intentions for the world. However, there are ethical problems with miracles of chance – why did Juliane survive when 91 others did not? Equally, why do hundreds of Jesus in the New Testament is clearly a man who engaged in a fight against evil – but he did not use miracles to prove God would thousands of people die every year when God could intervene to save them. • intervene in the world from above – in fact, when tempted in the desert, he refused to perform a miracle to show his power. This shows 2. Miracles by God through people: that real miracles are not integral to the Christian faith. This refers to the many instances in the Bible when God apparently empowers people to perform great miracles – such as Moses being given Wiles argues that accounts of miracles are “myths” that are presented to express something about God. the power to blight Egypt with 10 plagues and part the Red Sea to deliver the Jews from slavery. The belief is that humans can perform events • The only “miracle” that could be considered is creation itself – an extraordinary act by God that brought the earth into existence. with no scientific explanation through the power of God. • Paul Tillich: Miracles are symbols that point us to God – Jesus did not have to really be the son of God for this teaching to have a meaningful Miracles that people perform through God’s power are very important to the belief systems of the Catholic Church, as they sanctify Saints, impact on people. people who have performed miracles through the power of God. There is even an organisation that investigates miracles, called the “Congregation for the Causes of Saints”, that collects evidence from eyewitness testimony and medical records to confirm that a miracle has Hume’s criticism of miracles: taken place. Believers must have a realist view: Problems with this view: • For Hume, the only acceptable definition of a miracle is viewing it as a violation of natural law – the other two types of miracle do not have supernatural origins, so can be explained through sensory testing and reason. the historical integrity of accounts in the Bible are often questioned – it is suggested that writers have an agenda to prove the existence of Miracles are improbable: God/ tell stories that will make people believe in him. • Hume used probability to argue that there will always be more likely explanations than those coming from religion when it comes to miracles. (this can be t is impossible to strongly verify accounts of miracles after they have taken place as strong verification can only be done in person (synthetic), related to Occam’s Razor – the simplest explanation is normally the right one). or through reasonable argument (analytic), and this is not the case when hearing about miracles second-hand. • He argued that the more improbably a claim is (e.g. that a miracle has occurred) the more reliable the witness needs to be. He looks at Scripture and at 3. Miracles as a violation of the law of nature: religious believers and argues that the sources of their beliefs in miracles are not reliable enough, e.g. texts of the Bible have an evangelistic agenda (they In this case, a miracle refers to something that could not have happened when natural alone was at work. This event is brought about through were written to make people believe in Jesus, so they might not be true). • Scientific discoveries made the chances of miracles seem lower and lower – God was just an answer to a question mankind had yet to find the true answer the intervention of a supernatural power (e.g. God). The natural world is viewed as a “closed system” (i.e. one that is driven by its own set laws to. such as time, gravity, life and death). • He also spoke of laws of nature, which we have discovered through science & which are rarely broken. Logically, it is possible that if God exists, that he could intervene in this closed system and, for example, bring someone back to life after their Evidence from empiricism and psychology: death, or prevent a body from decomposing after death (the miracle of “incorruptibility”). Unlike the chance miracle, God wills directly to • Humans love surprise and wonder, adding a religious belief to this makes people less sensible and more willing to believe in miracles – ‘there is an end of break the natural law. common sense.’ Rather more archaically, he argues that most accounts of miracles come from ‘ignorant and barbarous nations’ and when found in “civilized” countries this Problems with this view: • is because they had ‘ignorant and barbarous ancestors.’ Science does not accept that it is possible to intervene in the natural laws, and many scientists completely deny the existence of a God who • Miracles are part of the psychology of belief but are not actually true. can intervene in the “closed system” of the world. Criticisms of Hume’s view: Laws of nature are descriptive, meaning that they sum up what has been previously observed – they are not prescriptive (saying what must • It is inductive so it only draws a probable conclusion. happen) so, logically, they cannot be broken. Hick: if there appears to be an exception to a law of nature, then the law simply expands to • Christians argue that reports of miracles are reliable so reject Hume’s witness-testimony argument. include that exception. • Hume’s psychological arguments are elitist and racist. What would happen if Hume himself witnessed a miracle? The problem of evil also questions why God does not intervene in all instances of evil in the world, again posing the ethical question, why do • some people experience miracles, but not all? 242 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Strengths of the realist view: Weaknesses of the realist view: Strengths of the anti-realist view: Weaknesses of the anti-realist view: • Miracles can be understood and talked about, giving • There is always a more likely explanation (Occam’s support to the stories of the Bible. This makes it Razor) than belief in an omnipotent and • Solves the question of the problem of • All miracles cannot be anti real; as already discussed the survival of Christianity more reasonable for Classical Theists to how their omnibenevolent God who gets involved in the world. evil because God does not intervene depends on certain miracles having definitely happened, such as Jesus’ beliefs. • Why doesn’t God always get involved in the world? in the world, as miracles should not resurrection • There are multiple different “types” of miracle – Why is this only sometimes? be taken literally as events that really – C S Lewis’ “trilemma” – Jesus was a lunatic, a liar, or the Lord. coincidence, through God by people & violation of • Miracles by God through people are often contained occur. In the Bible, Jesus Christ says many things such as “I am the son of God” or ” I can natural law – this means that miracles can be • Gives power to the message of heal this man” which suggest he is undeniably the son of God and capable of understood in a variety of ways, making it possible in the Bible – these accounts are unverifiable. Miracles performed by people today (e.g. faith Christianity whilst retaining logic – miracles. Either this is objectively true (realism) or it is false. for lots of different people to believe in them. accounts of miracles like the story of If it’s false, either Jesus was a madman, so not worthy of being followed. healers) may not be true, people may be falsely • Some evidence for them, e.g. testimony from Jesus’ resurrection are meaningful Or he was a liar – not the son of God but a manipulator who therefore was not the eyewitnesses, and personal religious experiences of convinced that they are healed because of the large because of the way they impact upon messiah. those who have experienced a miracle. amounts of emotions that they feel in this moment. Christian communities, but this does The other, realist option is that he truly was the son of God. Lewis points out that • Swinburne’s principle of Credulity and Testimony • Hume: miracles as violation of the natural law are not have to literally be true – this this is the only way that the Bible can be accepted, and so it must be true. adds support to accounts of miracles from the Bible highly improbable, witness testimony is likely wrong. makes it more reasonable. – Under Holland, miracles could also simply be a product of people’s minds; – if something seemed to be present, it probably • The problem of evil – why doesn’t God help • Miracles become personal – matching delusions as described by Dawkins or Atkins which cannot be trusted was. everyone? This is an ethical problem and can be with beneficial coincidences – this is Dawkins and other atheists would argue that God does not exist at all, and miracles • Keith Ward explains why not everyone can perform illustrated through Juliane Koepcke’s example – why shown through R.F. Holland’s are created by the human mind to support our belief in miracles. miracles - Not all humans are “opened up” to God, did God let the other 91 people die? example – for the mother, God’s Anti-realism therefore: so only some can use His power to have miracles • Anti-realists: it is better to understand them as existence is confirmed despite their • Takes away from the meaning of the Bible, which depends on literal miracles. performed through them – examples are the impactful not literal. being a scientific reason for why the • St Paul: “if Christ were not raised, then faith is futile.” (faith depends on the Catholic Saints. train stopped in time. resurrection really happening). • Witness testimony is contradicted by anti-realists because they do not believe Reasons why miracles are valuable for religious faith: miracles really occur in the world, they only occur in the mind. Therefore St Paul: Reasons why miracles are not valuable for religious faith: • Descriptions of miracles in the New Testament show that they are acts of great power which are seen as something extraordinary. The Problem of Evil: • The use of the word “signs” is often associated with the coming of God’s Kingdom and the eschatological fulfilment that is • The problem of evil leads us to question the logic of miracles – why does God get involved in the world and perform miracles that stop evil promised in Christianity. sometimes, but not always? For those that believe in realist interventions in the world from God, this causes a problem and could ultimately • The importance of miracles hinges on the death and resurrection of Christ himself, which confirmed he was the son of God. harm their faith, maybe even leading them to give up their faith if they encounter suffering and cannot explain why God did not stop it. • 1 Corinthians 15:17 “if Christ was not raised, then faith is futile.” • Furthermore, some theodicies imply that God does not get involved in the world to stop evil at all, counteracting the view that miracles can Providence: occur as a violation of the natural law. Both the Free Will Defence and the Vale of Soul Making theodicy show that evil has a role in creation • “Providence” – the doctrine that suggests that God takes care of His creation. (to encourage moral development) and that for humans to be truly free, God cannot get involved in the world to stop evil. • God is all-powerful and all-loving, and miracles confirm that he is active in the world to look after people through miracles and Science & Empiricism: other religious experiences. • Hume: miracles can only be termed as a violation of the natural law, but this is highly improbably as it goes against our experience of the • Miracles are therefore a violation of natural law which confirm God’s love and power. world (that natural laws are not broken). A more likely explanation is that the person giving testimony of the miracle is mistaken or a liar, and Anti-realism: we believe in miracles because of human psychology – love of awe and wonder, and the fact that we come from “ignorant and barbarous • Miracles become meaningful on a personal basis – e.g. in R.F. Holland’s example, Tillich said that they are “sign events” that point nations.” to the “Mystery of being” and allow people to have ecstatic religious experiences. • The statement “Miracles occur” is very difficult to empirically verify – often, miracles have another cause – this is particularly true for • R.F Holland supports this, giving the example of the child on the railway line – miracles are not supernatural, but have deeply miracles of beneficial coincidence. personal significance. Ultimately, it should be remembered that faith does not depend on evidence – faith is belief that goes beyond reason (it is self-authenticating • (it could be said that they confirm individual “bliks”). – Schleiermacher) – this means that it does not matter if there is evidence against miracles, because faith does not need evidence to be • Accounts of miracles are “myths” but have meaning through the way that they affect Christians. believed (Fideism). PHILOSOPHY • Myths are therefore not selective interventions from God, they are signs in the world for how to fight evil.

Practise Questions: Bullet point plan your answers as an optional extension: A01: 1. Examine realist views on miracles. 2. Examine the differences between realist and anti-realist views of miracles.) 3. Examine how miracles have value for religious faith. A02: 1. “Miracles prove the existence of God.” Evaluate this statement (40) 2. “It is best to take an anti-realist stance on miracles.” Evaluate this statement (40) Miracles A02 3. “Belief in miracles is illogical.” Evaluate this statement. (40) 243 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Philosophy Self, Death and the Afterlife Knowledge Organiser

Why defining the body/soul relationship is problematic Christianity and the existence of the soul/life after death: Key words The “Hard Problem” of Consciousness asks why it is that humanity’s mental experiences seem so Evidence from Genesis – different from the physical body. We feel as if there is something more to us than just our physical At creation, God breathes the “breath of life” into humanity, giving them life. Before this breath (Hebrew: • Soul – the spiritual part of a person, believed being “ruach”, meaning wind) enters Adam in Genesis 3, Adam is just “dust from the ground” that God used to form to be immortal. This is also known as the Traditionally, a common religious and philosophical viewpoint has been that all humans have a soul, a him. It is this breath that animates him, and this this breath is seen as the soul, being implanted in humans at spiritual substance given to us in creation/by God. creation. rational “mind”. The soul is seen to explain how humans have mentality – emotions, dreams, thought and personality. View of Thomas Aquinas –

• Consciousness – human awareness of being The soul is a separate spiritual part of the body. Thomas Aquinas adapted Aristotle’s theory, he understands that the soul gives the body life but believes in the PHILOSOPHY alive, the sense that we are more than just our Many religions and philosophers believe that the soul can survive death. Christian view of the afterlife. He therefore believes in a “hierarchy of souls” in creation – with humans at the However, advances in science suggest that humans do not have a separate soul, and argue that human top and non-sentient plants and the bottom. physical bodies and our personality/what consciousness is as a result of the physical body. John Hick’s Thought Experiment – makes us who we are is not connected to our • Hick believed in the soul (given that he created the Vale of Soul Making theodicy). However, he Materialism: proposed a thought experiment to show how materialists could still believe in God and life after death. physical form. General Principle – We are only our physical bodies, there is no separate part of us called • He argued that as God is all-powerful he could create a “replica” of a person at death in a new place. • Personal Identity – the unique personality the soul that contains our personal identity and can survive death. As the replica would be identical to the original copy, this means that personal identity and life traits, memories and thought processes that Scholars – Richard Dawkins – we are “machines made of meat”, programmed by our DNA, continues. These beings could exist in a “resurrection world” (heaven). and the sense the we have a conscience comes from the fact that we have evolved to have Criticisms – make use who we are. an extremely sophisticated brain. This is a problematic theory: is a replica really the same? Do we value replicas of the Moan Lisa as highly as the • Dualism – belief that we have a soul/mind Gilbert Ryle – believing in the soul is illogical, this is a “category mistake” – this is like saying Mona Lisa itself? What if people die in a terrible accident or of a horrible disease – will they still have these that is separate to the body. there is a ghost that lives in a machine that makes it function. It is ridiculous, illogical, and problems in the resurrection world? shows a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature and the world. It is just a thought experiment however, so its only job is to show materialists that their logic can still apply Cartesian Dualism – from Descartes, the belief to a world where God exists as a transcendent, omnipotent and omniscient creator. • Evidence - We know at death that our bodies decompose, this shows that the person is Rebuttal from Hick (John Smith Example): that we are two substances – corporeal gone and can no longer exist. • To respond to criticisms of the theory, Hick discusses “John Smith” – he argues that should Mr Smith be (matter) and non-corporeal (mind/soul). walking down the street in New York at one moment, and in the very next find himself in Delhi, but with • Materialism /Physicalism – the belief that we Dualism: the same personality and memories as the man who was in New York, Mr Smith would conclude that he General Principle – the soul/mind exists separately to the body, although the two interact. The soul are nothing more than our physical bodies. was the same person who had simply moved places in some astonishing way – he would still feel like the can exist outside of the body, and usually has the ability to survive death. same person. Hick argues that this is what death could feel like – we would feel the same because we • Functionalism – mental states are understood Plato – humans are made from matter that encases their soul. The soul existed before matter and would instantly appear in the resurrection world. by their functional role. wants to get back to the spiritual realm – living the life of a philosopher will allow the soul to escape at Swinburne's Analogy - compares the body to a socket and the soul to a light bulb. The socket may get broken death, those who do not achieve this are reincarnated. but the light bulb will lay dormant until it is fixed/plugged into power again. This means that the body can be • Reincarnation – the belief (originating in Aristotle – all beings have a soul that gives them their form (e.g. humans have a human soul). The soul damaged but the soul will be able to exist beyond it. Ancient India) that at death the soul will be contains our character that can be perfected over our lifetime. However, there is no afterlife and the soul cannot survive death. reborn into another body. Reincarnation • Near-Death Experience – an experience that Dual-Aspect Monism: In Hinduism: based on the Ancient Indian belief in the existence of the “atman” – a permanent essence of self General Principle – humans are made of one (unknown) ontological substance, but it is that is reborn through eternal lifetimes until moksha (enlightenment) is achieved – then the soul goes to inhabit occurs when a person, pronounced clinically evident in human nature that these substances have two aspects – spiritual and physical. a heavenly paradise outside the realms of rebirth with the universal Brahman (God-concept). Damien Keown dead, has an “Out of body” experience where This accounts for the hard problem of consciousness and explains why we feel like we are compares reincarnation to taking off clothes after a long day – at death, the soul sheds its current form and they can give an account of leaving their body more than just our physical bodies. puts on a new one, starting its new life. The soul stays the same but the outside is different, but each soul carries over personality traits into the next life. and observing themselves/entering the First and Third Person – The one substance has two aspects – first person, which causes qualia (mental interpretation of sense experience) and third person (physical being). When Evidence for: - Some people have past-life memories that can be verified, making it seem that this is a true phenomenon. afterlife. eating chocolate, for example, the first person processes the enjoyment that comes from - Hindus would argue that those that achieve enlightenment have perfect understanding of these concepts • Dual-Aspect Monism – the belief that humans eating it, whereas the third person refers to the physical and chemical changes in the body and remember all of their past lives at Moksha. are made of one ontological substance with that occur when eating the chocolate (e.g. saliva is released, stomach acid digests, Evidence against: two aspects, material and spiritual. endorphins released in blood, glucose converted to energy, fat stored in cells). - Occam’s Razor – not the most likely explanation. Relationship with Process Thought - Process Thought suggests that all beings will live after - Past life memories could be coincidence, lies or a hoax. Hume would argue that these come from the • Cogito, Ergo Sum! – “I think, therefore I am!” death, in the mind of God, who is intimately connected to the universe. This is a panpsychic human love of awe and wonder. He would also likely point out that these views come from another (Descartes). idea, relating to the view that all parts of the universe have a consciousness or soul of civilization that he would call “ignorant and barbarous” in nature. some kind. 244 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Descartes Strengths of Cartesian Dualism Weaknesses of Cartesian Dualism General Arguments: Based on his famous premise “Cogito, Ergo Sum!” – Descartes was concerned that perhaps he did not exist, that his life was an • Solves the “Hard Problem” of • It could be argued that our consciousness is actually a product of the human brain illusion and in reality he inhabited the mind of a demon. However, he came to the conclusion that the fact that he was worried consciousness. (Materialism – the “mind” is based on brain activity. about not existing in fact did prove to him that he existed. At least, it proves that a part of him exists that has the ability to • Supported by Fideism so • Neuroscience tells us that the mind depends on the physical brain. If the brain is appeals to religious physically damaged, one’s personality may change. think. He names this the “non-corporeal” part – or the rational mind/soul, which has the ability to think. This is evidence of believers. • Weak science – why the Pineal Gland? apriori reasoning – a conclusion that is drawn based on logic alone. • Supported by logic and • Descartes work gives circular arguments: clear and distinct perceptions rely on God, Descartes “Cartesian Dualism” is also known as “substance dualism” because he argues that there are two substances: the reasoning – “cogito, ergo but in his earlier work he argues God exists because of human perceptions. mind, which has the ability to think, and the body, which exists materially. sum” is an apriori concept • Physicalism - Everything has a physical cause – e.g. emotions such as love and Interactionism: Descartes identified the mind/soul as interacting with the body at a certain point in the brain, despite the two General strengths of Dualism: anger are as a result of chemical changes in the brain, people with old age become substances being separate. Descartes argued that the mind accessed the material self through the “Pineal Gland” – a gland in • Evidence of life after death – confused and forgetful as the brain becomes damaged over time. the centre of the brain. Near Death Experiences • Functionalism – Dennet’s mainframe theory suggests human consciousness can 3 Proofs: such as Pam Reynolds. continue without the body. 1. The argument from doubt: This is the basis of the argument, “cogito, ergo sum.” (“I think therefore I am”). It shows • Christians believe that God is supports substance dualism by showing that the fact that a thinking being exists cannot be doubted, evidenced through omnipotent so can do the fact that it is thinking, but the body itself could be doubted (because reality is an illusion and we live in the mind of a anything, including allowing demon). the soul to survive death. Evidence for the soul is in Self & Death A02 2. The argument from divisibility and indivisibility: this is a more philosophical argument that thinks about the nature of Genesis 3. the body/mind - Bodies, like other objects, exist in 3D (length, breadth, depth) and also exist in space and time, minds Strengths of Materialism Weaknesses of Materialism do not. The body can be broken down (e.g. decomposition at death), but the mind cannot. The differences between the two show that the mind is separate to the body and exists in a different logical/spiritual sphere. • Supported by science and empiricism. • The “Hard Problem” of Consciousness – how can it be that the 3. The argument from clear and distinct perception: The fact that we can think about the body not existing and the mind • Phineas Gage – had a severe brain injury and physical and spiritual parts of us seem so different? existing shows that the mind is a non-corporeal object with the purpose of thinking. The body is a corporeal object that had his personality completely changed, showing • Near Death Experiences such as Pam Reynolds seem to give does not think, whereas the “self”, contained in the mind, is separate from the body. If I cut off my arm, the arm on its that person identity is related to the hardware of evidence for life after death, suggesting humans can survive own would not have the ability to think, as it is just corporeal. The corporeal substance must be able to interact with the the brain. without their bodies. non-corporeal substance to create a living, thinking human. • Support from scientists such as Dawkins and • Dual-Aspect Monism argues that we are one ontological Links with Christianity: Ryle. substance with two separate aspects – the third person and the Descartes believed in a Christian view of the soul/mind and of the afterlife. This means that his theory supports the belief in • Soft materialism goes some way to acknowledge first person. grace (that people get eternal life in heaven through belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus) and that he believes that God that there is a spiritual part of us, although that is • Materialists could still survive after death according to John Hick’s will raise the souls in a spiritual resurrection. In his view, the mind/soul comes from God. stillStrengths caused by brainof Near-Death activity. Experiences Replica Theory.Weaknesses of New-Dearth Experience

• Evidence for them that cannot be explained in • Occam’s Razor (not the simplest explanation) Psychological Explanations for Life After Death any other way – e.g. Pam Reynolds was able to to say that people are having out of body Parfit’s Bundle Theory: give extremely accurate descriptions of what experiences. • We are connected to the states we used to be in and the states that we will be in through psychology and time, but there is not a happened to her when she was dead during • These experiences could be as a result of constant identity that exists between these states. • He calls these states “temporary terminal states” as there is no deeper level of ‘self’ inside us that remains the same – we are brain surgery. hypoxia (the brain being starved of oxygen and merely a bundle of these states. • Lots of NDEs have common factors, suggesting making sense of hearing, the last sense to be • We exist after death through the memories that people have of us, but there is not continuation of personal identity after death. that what people are experiencing is really true. lost). Dennet’s Functionalist Theory: PHILOSOPHY • Have real effects on people’s lives, e.g. they • They could be a hoax or a lie – e.g. NDE • AKA “mainframe theory”. • Argued from a Functionalist perspective that the brain could be uploaded onto a different platform after death, allowing the can lead to conversion. groups in American have made people famous, person to live on in a high-tech computer. making it more likely people would lie for fame. • He argues that a suitable robot, programmed with human memory, would have both a ‘self’ and a ‘body’ – the body being the Practise Questions: Bullet point plan yourIt alsoanswers gives in your them book a chance to corroborate robot and the brain being a computer. A01: similar features of NDEs, making this evidence Panpsychism and Process Thought: 1. Examine philosophical arguments regarding the body and soul. less reliable. 2. Examine conclusions that Descartes reaches about the body soul relationship. • This could be related to Process Thought (the response to the problem of evil put forward by Whitehead and Griffin). 3. Examine evidence against dualistic viewpoints of the body and soul. • Process Thought suggests that all beings will live after death, in the mind of God, who is intimately connected to the universe. A02: • This is a panpsychic idea, relating to the view that all parts of the universe have a consciousness or soul of some kind. 1. “Descartes’ understanding of the body and soul relationship is the best.” Evaluate this statement (40) • this relates to the scientific idea that energy in the universe can never be lost, it is just converted into another form. At death, the 2. “Challenges to dualism makes it an illogical viewpoint.” Evaluate this statement (40) soul/mind cannot be lost, it goes an inhabits a new state. (Materialists however would heavily criticise this view. 3. “There is no evidence in favour of Descartes’ theory” Evaluate this statement. (40) 245 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

• • •

•

• PHILOSOPHY • •

•

•

•

•

•

• •

246 Aspiration Creativity Character KS5 Knowledge Organiser Haggerston School

Strengths of Situation Ethics Weaknesses of Situation Ethics

That it provides a clear alternative to Christian ethics Roman Catholics are (generally) traditional and fundamentalist that is consistent to the Jesus represented in the – they follow the Bible as God’s revealed Divine Law. Gospels. Some would argue that it is more in line with Jesus’ teachings than following ALL the rules in Pope Pius XII banned Situation Ethics from being discussed at the Bible RC seminaries. Situation ethics is flexible and practical. It takes in to In 1952 Pope Pius XII called situation ethics ‘an individualistic account how complex human life is and can make and subjective appeal to the concrete circumstances of actions tough decisions when, from a legalistic stance, all to justify decisions in opposition to the natural law or God’s actions seem wrong. revealed will’. It is easy to understand: you follow a single principle So in other words he said that it was wrong to break God’s laws. (the Rule of Love). You don’t have to follow a conventional rule, if that This leads to the logical question: why would the Bible contain goes against your deepest sense of what love direct laws like the 10 Commandments if God only wanted us to requires – this allows people to be flexible instead of follow one rule? deontological. It is subjective – it depends on personal opinion on It is based on love, which, rationally as well as what the best thing to do is in a moral situation, and emotionally, is a key feature of all moral systems. people don’t always have the facts required to do the most loving thing. It is suitable for the modern world, and not as outdated as other theories (like NML). It is individualistic – what is the most loving thing to one, is not to another – sadists, for example, thing it is The 4 working principle are built-in strengths of the good to hurt others. theory, showing why it is good – e.g. relativism shows that love is always flexible to any situation, whereas It is prepared to accept any actions as long as the personalism prioritises human life. outcome is supposed to be loving – this could allow murder, rape etc. It is inconsistent with some teachings in the Bible – the Bible provides deontological rules for behaviour and this should not be ignored. How often do we face extreme cases where it is obvious what the most loving thing is? People need to be practical and Fletcher’s illustrations aren’t relevant for most people People need laws and rules to spell out behaviour to make it clear how they should behave. It is unnatural to ask people to behave in a way that is completely impartial/unconditional – we have personal preferences for our friends and family which means we will always treat them differently to strangers.

• •

• PHILOSOPHY

• • •

247 Aspiration Creativity Character