Read chapter 2,5 and 14 then respond to the following Qs in your own word minimum one paragraph with 5 sentences or two paragraphs maximum for each question and indicate page number.
*** I will provide chapters 2,5,14
1. What critique would a realist give of a nonrealist view of religion?
2. What is Wittgenstein ‘ s understanding of language , and how does it apply to religious language ?
3. Why is the debate between religious realism and nonrealism important for â€œdoingâ€ philosophy of religion?
1. How would you argue for or against the view that one needs evidence either to believe or to not believe in God? If evidence is needed, who (theist or atheist) has the burden of proof, and why?
2. If you believe in God, to what evidence do you appeal to support your belief? If you do not believe in God, what argument would you give against God ‘s existence? Carefully evaluate the strength of the arguments you give, noting the possibly problematic premises and critical assumptions.
3. What is Anselm’s ontological argument? What argument would you give to critique its central thesis that existence is a perfection, and how might a defender of the argument reply?
4. How is the contemporary version of the ontological argument similar to and different from Anselm ‘s version? What is one of its strengths and one of its Weaknesses?
5. What are the similarities and differences between the kalam and atemporal versions of the cosmological argument? Take one of the versions and note its critical premises, giving arguments either in support or in criticism of those premises,
6. What are the similarities and differences between the analogical, Anthropie, and Intelligent Design Versions of the teleological argument? Discuss why the teleological argument might or might not beg the question in affirming that there is order in the universe.
7. What is Gould’s argument against the Anthropic form of the teleological argument? What is Swinburne’s reply? Which do you find more convincing, and why?
8. What is Adams’s moral argument for God’s existence? What major problem might it encounter?
1. Make a list of some of the differences between various religions you know about. Are these differences significant or not? Defend your view, noting in particular the criteria you used to decide significance.
2. What is religious exclusivism? What critique might be given of exclusivism? How might the exclusivist respond to each of the objections you introduced?
3. How does the story of the blind men and the elephant help us understand religious pluralism? How might this analogy be turned into a criticism of pluralism? Would the story and its point change significantly if the men were not blind but partially sighted? Explain.
10. Use the criteria suggested by Yandell to evaluate your own or another religious tradition. Are the criteria clear enough to be applied, and do they successfully discriminate among religions? Justify your answer.