https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq Arguments for God's Existence en-us 2020-05-05 08:33:11 UTC 2026-02-12 03:23:54 UTC hello@padlet.com 32028361 https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551436108 2020-05-05 08:44:09 UTC https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551436108 32028361 https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551437876 - Context: why do people believe in God (for comfort when considering the ambiguity of the afterlife, to attribute meaning to life)
- Indicate structure of essay: mention the ontological, cosmological and teleological arguments as the main arguments in support of the existence of God
- Brief explanation of how each arguments reasoning for belief in God
- Mention how there is no empirical evidence to prove God's existence
- Thesis statement: upon analysing scholarly literature, it is apparent that the ontological, cosmological and teleological argument are too contested to objectively prove God's existence]]> 2020-05-05 08:44:50 UTC https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551437876 32028361 https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551451127 Topic Sentence: the ontological argument is too contested to objectively prove God's existence

Circular reasoning: assumes the existence of God

Burgess Jackson: "the use of the name God in a premise presupposes what is intended to be proven"
Argument is weak as it relies on the definition of God as "which no greater can be conceived." Conclusion is already contained in premises.

The arguments structure allows anything to be proven (this does not make it real)
- Gaunilo's Island Parody follows the same structure to prove the existence of an island that has characteristics that are logically impossible]]> 2020-05-05 08:50:21 UTC https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551451127 32028361 https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551468801 Topic Sentence: the cosmological argument is too contested to objectively prove God's existence

The infinite regress is an ambiguous concept. We cannot examine first hand how the world was created

The argument relies on the infinite regress being an impossible concept to prove God exists, but if nothing comes from nothing, where does the first cause (God) come from
Aquinas asserting based on faith that there is an uncaused causer

Weak inference that the uncaused causer is God: requires a leap of faith. The argument is constructed to prove the existence of a first cause but does not prove that this cause is God]]> 2020-05-05 08:57:38 UTC https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551468801 32028361 https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551478991 Topic Sentence: the teleological argument is too contested to objectively prove God's existence

Argument based off the contestable view that the most likely explanation of anthropic coincidences that enable life to survive is the existence of an intelligent designer. Evidence cited for this: temperature, density, mass.
Cannot test theory empirically
Charles Darwin: scientifically proven theory of evolution contests the teleological argument
The flaws in human bodies disprove the idea of the infallible creator (cite Abby Hafar for this, note biased perspective)

William Paley Watch Analogy (if to be accepted teleologists have to accept that God's creations can be flawed]]> 2020-05-05 09:01:56 UTC https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551478991 32028361 https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551505493 Rephrase thesis statement
Note how scholarly deliberation is inevitable in the absence of empirical evidence
Jean Paul Satre: when it comes to God "we are doomed to speculate"]]> 2020-05-05 09:12:53 UTC https://padlet.com/32028361/dq6lvaptxxk9oyq/wish/551505493