Show-Me the Argument

With theological commitments aside, if a person accepts either a cosmological or ontological argument for a diety’s (God’s) existence, why should she or he accept that the cause or being cares about human beings? In other words, why should they not simply remain agnostic as to whether that diety is deistic or theistic?

I know this question is a bit vague as there are numerous comsological arguments as well as ontological arguments, but it seems to me that theism does not necessarily follow from the standard versions of the arguments (exception: Descartes’ argument, but this leads to a different sort of worry), i.e. ones used in intro courses. Some additional premise(s) is needed. Thus, I’m wondering how is Theism supposed to follow from the arguments. (more…)

This post is going to be on one of those borderline topics between philosophy of religion and theology that Shaun talked about.  There’s a debate between exclusivists and inclusivists, and I just want to get the debate straight and then ask a question. (more…)

Background: Patrick and I were having a discussion (inspired by an earlier discussion that we had with Eric Roark) the other day concerning whether God could be considered morally praiseworthy for his character given that he is essentially good.  I proposed that libertarians about free will whose intuitions are driven primarily by ultimate source concerns (rather than primarily by PAP concerns) might maintain that God is morally praiseworthy on account of the fact that God is the ultimate source of his own character, and that they could consistently maintain that God is the ultimate source of his own character by maintaining that the causal explanation for God’s being essentially good lies in the fact that God wills to be essentially good.  They can also, I argued, maintain that God could not have willed otherwise than to be essentially good, on account of the fact that God’s being essentially good entails that God could not do otherwise than will to be essentially good.  Patrick charged this proposal with exhibiting vicious explanatory circularity.  But, as of yet, I don’t see that my proposal does exhibit vicious explanatory circularity. (more…)