PhD Doctor of Philosophy Philosophy of God and Religion 4 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Immanuel Kant's critique of the ontological argument rests on his claim that:
- Existence is a real predicate that adds to our concept of a thing
- The concept of a necessary being is self-contradictory
- Existence is not a determining predicate and 'exists' adds nothing to a concept (Correct answer)
- We cannot form a coherent concept of an infinitely perfect being
Correct answer: Existence is not a determining predicate and 'exists' adds nothing to a concept
Kant argued that existence is not a 'real predicate' that augments a concept, so saying God 'exists' adds no content to the concept of God, undermining the ontological argument's claim that existence belongs to God's essence.
Question 2: The via negativa (apophatic theology) in thinkers like Pseudo-Dionysius and Maimonides holds that:
- God can only be described through analogical predication drawn from creatures
- All positive attributes truly apply to God in a supereminent degree
- No positive predicates can properly be applied to God; we can only say what God is not (Correct answer)
- Religious language is purely expressive and carries no cognitive content
Correct answer: No positive predicates can properly be applied to God; we can only say what God is not
Apophatic theology maintains that divine transcendence is so radical that all positive predications are inadequate; the proper path is negating attributes derived from finite creatures.
Question 3: William James in 'The Will to Believe' argues that adopting religious belief without sufficient evidence is justified when:
- The hypothesis is live, the option is forced and momentous, and evidence is insufficient to decide (Correct answer)
- The believer has had a direct mystical experience confirming the belief
- The belief produces positive social outcomes for the community
- Moral duties require postulating God's existence as Kant argued
Correct answer: The hypothesis is live, the option is forced and momentous, and evidence is insufficient to decide
James held that on genuine options—live, forced, and momentous—where evidence cannot settle the question, one's 'passional nature' may legitimately tip the balance toward belief.
Question 4: In discussions of religious pluralism, John Hick's 'pluralistic hypothesis' holds that the great world religions are:
- All equally false projections of human psychological needs
- Equally valid culturally conditioned responses to a single transcendent Real (Correct answer)
- Best harmonized by adopting a perennial philosophy beyond all traditions
- Incompatible in doctrine but overlapping in moral teaching only
Correct answer: Equally valid culturally conditioned responses to a single transcendent Real
Hick proposed that diverse religious traditions are different human responses to the same ultimate transcendent Reality, which itself transcends all particular doctrinal formulations.
Question 5: The 'felix culpa' theodicy, associated with Augustine and later Leibniz, argues that:
- Evil is necessary for the development of moral virtue in creatures
- The Fall was fortunate because it occasioned the greater good of Incarnation and redemption (Correct answer)
- Natural evil and moral evil serve entirely different theological functions
- God permitted evil to demonstrate His power over chaos
Correct answer: The Fall was fortunate because it occasioned the greater good of Incarnation and redemption
Felix culpa ('happy fault') argues that Adam's sin was providentially permitted because it led to the greater good of Christ's Incarnation and the redemption of humanity.
Question 6: Skeptical theism, as defended by Michael Bergmann and Stephen Wykstra, responds to evidential arguments from evil by contending that:
- We have good independent reasons to expect God to permit all actual evils
- Human cognitive limitations make it unsurprising that we cannot identify all the goods that justify God's permission of evil (Correct answer)
- The existence of moral saints proves that evil serves redemptive purposes
- Gratuitous evil is actually logically impossible if God exists
Correct answer: Human cognitive limitations make it unsurprising that we cannot identify all the goods that justify God's permission of evil
Skeptical theism argues that our inability to see a justifying reason for an evil does not imply there is none, given the vast cognitive gap between human and divine perspectives (CORNEA principle / 'sceptical theism').
Question 7: Eleonore Stump's 'Aristotelian-Thomistic' account of the problem of evil appeals primarily to which concept to explain why God permits suffering?
- Creaturely libertarian freedom
- The integration of the will and intellect toward union with God as the ultimate good (Correct answer)
- The logical necessity of contrast for creatures to appreciate goodness
- The eschatological compensation that outweighs all temporal evils
Correct answer: The integration of the will and intellect toward union with God as the ultimate good
Stump argues that God permits suffering because it can serve the deeper good of the integration and healing of the human person toward loving union with God, a good creatures may irrationally flee.
PhD Doctor of Philosophy Philosophy of God and Religion 4
Immanuel Kant's critique of the ontological argument rests on his claim that: