18 terms



Terms in this set (...)

-The belief in a personal God who is creator of the world and is perfect in knowledge, power, and goodness
-History is linear, leading to fulfillment of God's purpose for humanity
The position that nature alone in its totality is the only reality; there is no God or deity
Belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe
4 Models of the Interaction of Science and Religion
Conflict, Independence, Dialogue, Integration
Faith and Reason Video (look at stapled thing)
-People think God is working through natural process
-Worried if evolution is accepted, morality will decrease
-Galileo was not accepted and his theory was not proved
-Newton tried to use physics to support theology
-Some don't support genetic manipulation because they think it is playing god (debate of cloning)
-Genetics are also used into research for diseases
-Some theologists think science is important in understanding the world around us
-Some think religious values can help the world's support of science
Debate CRAIG
1) Religion helps scientific framework
2) Science can verify/falsify religious claims
3) Science helps metaphysical problems
4) Religion adjudicates scientific theories (ex: if there are two competing, scientific theories religion will help decide the better one)
Debate GALE
-Science challenges and refutes religion
-Religion and common sense go hand in hand
-Scientific method does not include religion
-Science and religion argument is based off dialogue
-Science developed in western culture
Ex nihilo component: big bang couldn't have been caused out of nothing
-Science doesn't need religion and is its own foundation
-Religion gives rise to science, but science challenges religion
-Religion is the common sense of the worl
-Religion doesn't show creationism, it just shows there was a beginning
-Against the fine tuning argument, says evolution fine tunes on its own
Debate SMITH
-Each state of the universe is casually explained by the previous part
-But the universe caused itself and there is no room for God
-Uses Xeno's paradox type of reasoning
-Yes there was a big bang, but this doesn't constitute the first moment in the universe
-Creation is ____ with scientific realism
-It's one thing to say that each part of the universe is caused by something else BUT that doesn't mean the universe is caused by all of the small parts that it is made up of
Debate SMITH
-Naturalism is a part of the evolutionary theory (cannot separate them)
-Evolutionary psychology isn't confirmed yet
-Genetic psychology establishes genetic inheritance of personality traits (including theistic beliefs) (more susceptible to having theistic beliefs)
-BUT atheism is not a part of the evolutionary hypothesis and there is nothing about biological theory that entails a metaphysical POV
-AND the debate is not about genetic legacy
Debate PLANT
-Conflict between naturalism and christianity (BUT not science and christianity)
-Superficial conflict but deep concord between christ and science
-Superficial concord but deep conflict between evolution and science
-Evolutionary psych: speculative, soft-science (should not be taken seriously)
-Naturalism--> scientific evidence
-Theism --> scientific evidence and revelation
-If accept naturalism and evolution --> cognitive faculties are low and unreliable
-LOOK UP metaphysical vs methodological naturalism
Book CHAPTER 1 (P)
-Evolutionary theory is compatible with theistic belief
---->As long as it is said that evolution is guided
---->How do mutations form if they don't help at the time? (LOOK UP ARGUMENT)
---->Randomness could still be guided it just appears random to us
-Anti-theistic arguments
---->Evolution undercuts design argument BUT it actually doesn't because evolution could be designed
---->Evolution is wasteful and creates suffering, why would an all loving God do that? BUT we don't know God's plan and suffering could be necessary
---->Okhamistic process says that anti-theistic arguments are better than theistic arguments BUT doesn't mean anti-theistic arguments are superior OR more plausible
-Naturalism vs Evolution
---->Can't accept naturalism and evolution (pg.17)
Book CHAPTER 2 (D)
-Evolutionary theory is compatible with theistic belief (P)
---->Right in the way P defines
---->Supermanism: What if superman created the big bang and started the evolutionary process? Why should this be considered any different than theism?
---->Basically there are other theories apart from theism that are also compatible with science
-No part in evolution that says mutations are uncaused (P)
---->Computers also have random number generators, which have mistakes???
-Naturalism is tacitly assumed in all reputable courts of law and throughout scientific investigation
Book CHAPTER 3 (P)
-Says he was arguing God and evolution are possible, not true
-Theism isn't like supermanism because humanlike creatures don't live for that long aren't capable of intervening in evolution
- Naturalism is NOT assumed in all courts of law
---->Science explores, explains, and discovers how the world works
---->No metaphysical perspectives involved (VIDEO ARGUMENT EVIDENCE)
Book CHAPTER 4 (D)
-Supermanism is supposed to be foolish
---->Sci-fi superheros have magic powers, so does Jesus (supposedly)
---->P's faith disciplined his thoughts
-Naturalism IS assumed, scientists don't theorize and include God in their studies
Book CHAPTER 5 (P)
-Supermanism is similar in some ways BUT atheism is also similar to solipsism
---->Both deny existence of personal beings (god vs all other people)
---->Both go against many common beliefs
---->Both are hard to support
-God is a necessary being that sets standards for morality, Superman doesn't
-Could modify superman into a god-like being, but then you basically just have theism