PHIL 347 MIDTERM #2 EXAM |107 Q’S AND A’S
Three Types of Ontological Arguments - -1) Plantinga/Godel 2) Anselm 3) Descartes-
Leibniz
-Modal Logic - -Logical of modalities
-Modalities - -Claim to the effect is necessary or possible
-Example of modalities is the logical truth that a necessary event is also _____ - -possible
-Claim that ______________ must be accepted for Plantinga's ontological argument to work - -
If it is possible that it is necessary that P, then P is true
-S5 - -Standard system of logic
-S5 accepts ___________ as true - -if it is possible that it is necessary that P, then P is true
-State of Affairs - -Anything that could be the case
-State of affairs corresponds to propositions where if the state of affairs is obtained, then it
is ______ - -true
-Maximal State of Affairs - -State of affairs either includes or precludes any other state of
affairs AKA Possible world
-Possible world is also known as _______ - -Maximal State of Affairs
-Possible World - -Not contradictory; maximally consistent state of affairs or a complete
way things can be
-Are possible worlds true? - -Not always; Possible worlds are only maximally consistent
state of affairs, but do not have to be obtained/be true (ex. Harry Potter Book 1-7 is a
maximal state of affairs, but it is not obtained as it is not true)
-Semantics - -Laying down of truth statements
-Possible that P - -P is true in at least one possible world
-Necessary that P - -P is true in all possible worlds
-P - -P is true in the actual world
-Iterated Modalities - -Combining modalities (ex. Possible that it is possible, Necessary
that it is possible, Possible that it is necessary)
, -口 P - -Necessary P
-♢P - -Possible P
-→ - -then
-"If it is possible that it is necessary that P, then P is true" in shorthand is _________ - -♢口 P
→P
-5 Step Plantinga/Gödel's Modal Ontological Argument - -1) It is possible that God exists
2) God exists if and only if it is necessary that God exists 3) It is possible that it is necessary
that God exists (based on 1/2 ) 4) For any proposition P, if it's possible that it is necessary
that P, then P is true 5) Hence, God exists
-Believing in the __________ under _________ means that you believe God exists - -possibility of
God/ iterated modalities
-4 OBJECTIONS AGAINST PLANTINGA/GÖDEL'S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT - -1) Graham
Oppy 2) Peter van Inwagen 3) Leah 4) S7
-Graham Oppy's Objection Against Plantinga/Godel's Ontological Argument - -Valid if
inference follows premise, regardless if premises are true and ontological argument is
based on P1/2/4; Oppy denies P1
-Peter van Inwagen's Objection Against Plantinga/Godel's Ontological Argument - -Need
to provide a reason for P1 that vindicates rational for theistic belief
-Leah's Objection Against Plantinga/Godel's Ontological Argument - -Possible that an all
evil being exists
-S7's Against Plantinga/Godel's Ontological Argument - -Rejection accessibility relation
and that necessities do not vary across worlds
-Accessibility Relationship - -A necessities in one world should be necessity in all; there
should be no scenario in which it is false
-Andre Irvine on S7 - -Scientific attitude takes theory and needs to be judged true or false
based on reality and in accordance with scientific attitude, it must be possible for any
logical principle to be POSSIBLY false. In order for it to be possible for a logical principle to
be POSSIBLE false, we must reject necessitation. Rejects assumption that inconceivability
equates to impossibility and denies analytical truths.
-Anselm's argument seeks acknowledge the __________ of God - -omni-attribute and perfect
mind
Three Types of Ontological Arguments - -1) Plantinga/Godel 2) Anselm 3) Descartes-
Leibniz
-Modal Logic - -Logical of modalities
-Modalities - -Claim to the effect is necessary or possible
-Example of modalities is the logical truth that a necessary event is also _____ - -possible
-Claim that ______________ must be accepted for Plantinga's ontological argument to work - -
If it is possible that it is necessary that P, then P is true
-S5 - -Standard system of logic
-S5 accepts ___________ as true - -if it is possible that it is necessary that P, then P is true
-State of Affairs - -Anything that could be the case
-State of affairs corresponds to propositions where if the state of affairs is obtained, then it
is ______ - -true
-Maximal State of Affairs - -State of affairs either includes or precludes any other state of
affairs AKA Possible world
-Possible world is also known as _______ - -Maximal State of Affairs
-Possible World - -Not contradictory; maximally consistent state of affairs or a complete
way things can be
-Are possible worlds true? - -Not always; Possible worlds are only maximally consistent
state of affairs, but do not have to be obtained/be true (ex. Harry Potter Book 1-7 is a
maximal state of affairs, but it is not obtained as it is not true)
-Semantics - -Laying down of truth statements
-Possible that P - -P is true in at least one possible world
-Necessary that P - -P is true in all possible worlds
-P - -P is true in the actual world
-Iterated Modalities - -Combining modalities (ex. Possible that it is possible, Necessary
that it is possible, Possible that it is necessary)
, -口 P - -Necessary P
-♢P - -Possible P
-→ - -then
-"If it is possible that it is necessary that P, then P is true" in shorthand is _________ - -♢口 P
→P
-5 Step Plantinga/Gödel's Modal Ontological Argument - -1) It is possible that God exists
2) God exists if and only if it is necessary that God exists 3) It is possible that it is necessary
that God exists (based on 1/2 ) 4) For any proposition P, if it's possible that it is necessary
that P, then P is true 5) Hence, God exists
-Believing in the __________ under _________ means that you believe God exists - -possibility of
God/ iterated modalities
-4 OBJECTIONS AGAINST PLANTINGA/GÖDEL'S ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT - -1) Graham
Oppy 2) Peter van Inwagen 3) Leah 4) S7
-Graham Oppy's Objection Against Plantinga/Godel's Ontological Argument - -Valid if
inference follows premise, regardless if premises are true and ontological argument is
based on P1/2/4; Oppy denies P1
-Peter van Inwagen's Objection Against Plantinga/Godel's Ontological Argument - -Need
to provide a reason for P1 that vindicates rational for theistic belief
-Leah's Objection Against Plantinga/Godel's Ontological Argument - -Possible that an all
evil being exists
-S7's Against Plantinga/Godel's Ontological Argument - -Rejection accessibility relation
and that necessities do not vary across worlds
-Accessibility Relationship - -A necessities in one world should be necessity in all; there
should be no scenario in which it is false
-Andre Irvine on S7 - -Scientific attitude takes theory and needs to be judged true or false
based on reality and in accordance with scientific attitude, it must be possible for any
logical principle to be POSSIBLY false. In order for it to be possible for a logical principle to
be POSSIBLE false, we must reject necessitation. Rejects assumption that inconceivability
equates to impossibility and denies analytical truths.
-Anselm's argument seeks acknowledge the __________ of God - -omni-attribute and perfect
mind
