Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

existence of God is synthetic?

  • 28-03-2010 11:37pm
    #1
    equivariant
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 966 ✭✭✭


    Caveat: I'm not an expert in philosophy but I am interested in the nature of knowledge.

    One of the 'Holy Grails' for certain types of philosophers (of religion) is an argument to make the existence of God into an analytic proposition (or perhaps to make it into a priori knowledge - I am slightly hazy on the distinction between analytic and a priori). I am thinking of William Lane Craig and his cosmological argument and/or Plantinga's ontological argument.

    It seems to me that this is a misuse of philosophy. The existence/nonexeistence of God must surely be a synthetic proposition (maybe empirical is a better word)? Are there any philosophers out there willing to comment on this issue?


Comments

  • #2
    Joe1919
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Joe1919


    equivariant wrote: »
    ....The existence/nonexeistence of God must surely be a synthetic proposition (maybe empirical is a better word)? .....

    analytical/synthetic explained here.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic-synthetic_distinction

    Both Aquinas and Immanuel Kant would agree with you here.

    Thomas Aquinas always insisted that it is not self-evident that God exists and God can only be known by his effects. (ST 1a.2.1-2)

    Kant more or less states the same. One of his argument may be set out like this:
    If you have a triangle, then you must have three angles, as not having three angles would involve a contradiction.
    But you do not have to have a triangle and therefore you do not have to have the three angles either.
    Similarly in the case of God as defined as a necessary being:
    If you accept that there is a God, then you must accept that his existence is necessary, as not accepting this would involve a contradiction.
    But you do not have to accept that there is a God and therefore you do not have to accept that his existence is necessary.


Advertisement