CRUZ, MA. SARAH LAUREN F. | 4-ABMC | TTH 1:00-2:30
Chapter 1
The Ontological argument is one of the many arguments that supports the existence of God. The ontological argument used for the existence of God was fist constructed in the Proslogion of Saint Anselm, the Archbishop of Canterbury. The ontological argument is concerned with the nature and relations of being. It attempts to answer questions like “What is real?” Anselm’s ontological proof tends to answer the question of whether or not God is real. In this argument, Anselm defines God as “which nothing greater can be conceived,” which can also be understood as God as perfect. God is defined as “the greatest possible being” in this argument. God too is said to have perfect power : omnipotence. There arises the question if God can create a round square. Can this God bend the rules of logic? But it can be said that God is only omnipotent to the greatest possible extent. Also, in this argument it claims that God cannot do what is logically impossible, but he can do anything that can be done. To conclude, it comes down from “God is omnipotent and can do literally anything,” to “God is omnipotent to the greatest possible extent.”
Chapter 2
In this St. Aquinas’ cosmological argument for the existence of God, it is constructed in 5 proofs. First is the argument from motion which talks about, from his observations from Aristotle that concluded from common observation that an object that is in motion is put into motion by another object or force. From this, St. Thomas believes that there must have been an unmoved mover (God) who first put things in motion. He starts from a posteriori position. The second proof is the argument from causation of existence which deals with the issue of existence. St. Aquinas concluded that from observation, there is no object that creates itself, some previous being or object had to create it. So, he believes that there must have been an uncaused first cause (God) who began the existence of all things. The third way is the is the contingent and necessary objects, which is a reference to contingency and necessary. This defines two types of objects in the universe which are contingent and necessary beings. Contingent beings are caused not every being can be contingent there must exist a being which is necessary to cause contingent beings this necessary being is God. The fourth way is the argument from degrees and perfection, St. Thomas concluded that for any given quality, there must be a perfect standard by w/c all these given qualities are measure and these perfections, God has them. The fifth way is the argument from intelligent design w/c has to do something w/ our observable universe and the order of nature. It is implied in this argument that common sense tells us that the universe works in such a method that one can infer that it was designed by an intelligent designer who is God. All that the universe has and how it works are all designed and ordered by God, the intelligent designer.
Chapter 3
The teleological argument according to Paley is the inference from the observation of the intricate design of the universe to the conclusion of a universe-maker who created and designed its use would be inevitable. Watch watchmaker. Universe universe maker. Paley argues that if there is a maker for the watch, then there is a maker for the universe and that would be God. Also, in Hume’s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion wherein it shows that Paley’s argument is more of an argument to design while Hume’s argument is argument from design.
Chapter 4
In this argument, Newman was concerned with defending faith as a recognized product of rational human activity, also that assent is not opposed to human nature. Newman was trying to point out that one can believe as long as one apprehends, even if one does not understand. According to Newman, apprehension is simply an “intelligent acceptance of the idea/fact w/c a proposition enunciates.” For Newman, logic is an important utility for science and in the society. But then its real-world purpose is limited in that its applicability is regulated by its assumptions. Newman’s view is related to experience and innate ability.
Chapter 5
Pascal’s wager is an argument for the belief in God with the grounds not based on appeal to evidence that God exists but on the grounds that appeals to self-interest. The argument implies that it is in our interests to believe in God and it is therefore reasonable for us to do so. If we believe in God, the argument continues, then if he exists then we will receive an infinite reward in heaven but if he does not then we have lost little or nothing yet still lived a life with a set of rules that goes with the belief in God. If we do not believe in God, then if he exists then we will receive an infinite punishment in hell but if he does not then we will have gained little or nothing. So if someone was to choose, the first one is preferable because either receiving an infinite reward or losing little or nothing is better than receiving an infinite punishment in hell or gaining little or nothing.
Chapter 6
The experience of the Holy and the Idea of God is in John Smith’s work. He wants us to know that in the crucial events of our lives such as choosing a course, deciding on a career, entering a vocation such as priesthood or marriage, a time of serious illness or going abroad and the like are the “turning points” in our life. These situations in our lives have an insistence that makes us pause and makes us have a little detour from our everyday, out of routine, lives. These situations make us reflect on the seriousness and most especially the value of life and everything that it offers us. John Smith infers in this argument that people believes in God through experiences that are very crucial to him/her because it is in those crucial experiences or situations that they feel the divine presence of God. Also, with these crucial junctures in man’s life, celebrations/ceremonies take place to intensify and preserve the value of the moment. Although there is a distinction from these persons, objects, events and places : Holy and Profae. For the Holy one, these are the things that are set apart from the usual and ordinary because of the sense that the Holy is powerful, important, precious, and serious. While the profane is obvious and ordinary, it manifests to the usual happenings in everyday lives and has no depth of meaning in it.
Chapter 7
The idea of the Holy is devoted to the non-rational or supra-rational aspects. Otto infers in this argument that the numinous state of mind comprises the core of all religious beliefs and practices. He views that the experience of the “beyond” and the “holy” as involving a sense of wonderment that cannot be expressed in human language or defended on the grounds of rational theories. Otto perceives that the rational explanations has the tendency to bring down the reality of God.

II.

Together, then, these arguments asserts to validate the existence of a perfect, necessary, transcendent being that created the universe, has authority over it, and takes an interest in humanity. All of the arguments goal is to really show and prove that there really is a God and to show the believers that what they are believing in is real/true. It talks about God, what is, who is, why is, and how is God, himself. If all these arguments can be accomplished, it would be more than enough to show to everyone and everything, believers and non-believers, that the conception of God, and all other intentions, propositions, ideas, aims, and or designs that are related to it, are close to the truth.

III.
I was born in a family of Roman Catholics. I am baptized inside the Church. I grew up reading a Bible and from time to time doing the sign f the cross and for countless times have I been into a Church talking to someone or something that I cannot see nor touch. This has been the way of my life, my belief. To start with, I am a believer. Almost all the rules and “procedures” that I follow as a guide in my life, are based on my belief in God. I grew up believing that because of His son, we are all saved and therefore we should be thankful to Him. But when I came to college, I became more mature and have encountered Philosophy. This course does test your faith (for believers). It makes you question things if what you really are believing in is real or right. It happened to me, I do question things now because I think that is human nature, to be curious. Also, with all the lessons and readings that I have encountered, I have learned to “question.” But my faith is still intact, why? it is because for me, I have found Pascal’s Wager the most striking in this course. If there really is a God, then I have lived my life well in praising Him and thanking Him along with all the other rules that I have attached with it but then if there’s not, I have nothing to lose. How can I say that? It is because with or without a God, it is understood that we should all be respectful, caring, responsible for our own acts, do well for ourselves and many more that even if we’re not obliged to do so, these things still promote common good and this common good is a part of living with the belief in a God. So for me, it’s a win-win situation if you believe in a God.