Week 8: Cosmological and Design Argument

This week, we are focusing on the Cosmological argument and the Design argument. These arguments represent how one can think about religion from a philosophical perspective.
In your blog, I would like you to reflect more generally on what, if anything, you think philosophy might contribute to the understanding of religion. Think about i) whether you think these arguments might change someone's relgious convictions, and ii) whether there is anything about religious experience that is left out of these arguments (for example, some people might say that faith is important for religious conviction, yet of course faith has no role in philosophical argument).

Philosophy as a whole focuses on in depth analysis and theories of what we are, who we are, where we are and why we are here. In doing so many upon many different arguments arise and oppose different standpoints varying from person to person. 
The cosmological argument proves certain of the existence of God and his creation of the universe. As a Catholic i believe in the theory of the "first cause" and the first uncause cause being God. People could argue based on standpoints but the religious theme is apparent and pretty convincing in my eyes. The conclusions of God portray his creation of the universe since the early times of this earth. 
Diverging from the topic of philosophy one of the most prominent arguments and points that prove religion as a strong experience and faith is the stance of art. Art has always reflected expressive and personal qualities, people display the world around them with the influence of knowledgeable beliefs. Religion and the creator of the universe have played apparent influences on the illustrations, aniconically displaying the creator of the universe but iconically representing the servers of God. Through Shepards, Jesus Christ, Virgin Mary, Saints and Angels the creator of the universe is shown to be a prime belief of the people. 
Basically has religion and the creator of the universe God influenced the people since the dawn of time? YES. It still continues to live in the minds of people globally because as the Cosmological Argument states the first uncause cause is God.

Week 5: Metaphysics- dualism & physicalism

Should we, as human beings, think of ourselves as made out of two different substances, like Decartes argued? Or are you persuaded by the arguments of physicalism that we are purely physical beings?
If you agree with Descartes, how would you explain the fact that our mental life seems to be very closely connected to a physical organ, namely the brain. If you agree with physicalism, how do you explain the fact that our mental life seems to be like nothing else in the physical world (think of how unique something like consciousness is, for example).
Write your thoughts on these issues

So the introduction to metaphysics in philosophy is by far the most controversial topic in my eyes. Dualism and physicalism both play opposite rolls in proving two different ends of the spectrum. Dualism is the belief which Descartes follows stating that the body is a physical being and the mind is a nonphysical entity which can not be explained by physics or science. Physicalism is a belief which follows the motto that the body is one physical entity which involoves the brain, the mind is non existant, and every mental function including decisions, thoughts, and choices are in the brain and can be explained physically.


Now as a person who is induced all this information at once i was concerned with my choice because i sided with both for specific reasons. I agreed with the dualist theory because i believe the things a mind can do are unexplainable, no physical evidence can prove any human behavior to be justified just because of what they think they know and conclude through our physical brains. However physicalism does support the brain as the main part of our bodies and accounts it for various mental interpretations and functions through the physical world. 

After weighing my options in which to believe Descartes finally convinced me that dualism is more into my beliefs. He fought to support and agree with dualism in numerous ways which are all in the Basic Premise he wrote, all of his standpoints including The Argument from Doubt, The Argument from Divisibility, The Argument from Consciousness and so on.  His strong arguments provided a basic take on the tradition that pertain to us as individuals and mental freedom, his exploration into the takes of consciousness and self-awareness harness a heavy load of mystery and provided me with all the notion i needed to side with dualism.


I do still believe that the brain helps the body function and creates certain physical explanations to how we respond to the world outside, but the mind and soul to me are separate and reach a higher standing, mentally, than the brain ever will. It accounts for the great enlightenment's in life, it pertains to the vague mysteries of our actions, and is something that will never be available to fully understand.  As an open minded person i do look at both sides with perks however i portray in my opinion a more spiritual look upon the body as one entity and the mind as another. Though the physicalist's might tend to disagree i hope i did atleast fully explain why i chose the dualist form of metaphysics. The mind and soul are metaphysical and in a spiritual sense eternal, they are the traces of religion and the center of a person's inner beliefs and functions.

Week 4: Pragmatism and Epistemology

Pragmatism and Feminist Epistemology both challenge the view of knowledge as a detached, intellectual activity. Do you think they are right? How do you think we should think about knowledge? Now that we have concluded the section on epistemology, write about what kind of thing you think knowledge is.


Pragmatism and Feminist Epistemology are two varied concepts of philosophy but both agree on one thing, knowledge is gained through outside sources (experience, belief, observation, society, religion, etc.). As i was reading these two different approaches to philosophy they were easy to relate to and I would have to agree with them in terms of challenging the view of humans gaining knowledge as a detached and intellectual activity.

Pragmatism follows a structure on knowledge that serves the general idea that the meaning of our beliefs are the actions that they result in. This philosophical approach to knowledge is very straight forward and informing in a practical manner. This basic belief is not any definitive phenomenon however it is something that many people go by. If a belief you go by works for you in practice and successfully guides your actions in reality, the belief has been proven true by experience. If not you can work on adjusting the belief to make it a better belief. I strongly agree with this because truths in ones mind must be validated and verified by one's actions in reality. Gaining knowledge through this philosophical approach is practical and simple to follow using beliefs and ideas as a guide to our future actions.


Feminist Epistemology to me seemed as a modern day inquiry to the publishing's of philosophy based on subjective views of influence (sex, gender, society, religion, etc.). Feminists' reflect the ways that gender did and does influence our mental concepts of knowledge. Emphasizing that subjective matters do influence even the most "objective" works of philosophy. I do have to also agree with this because their points are very evident and true, you can not write an essay without your subjective matters influencing your knowledge. 



All of these theories and topics of knowledge have caught my attention because i either agreed with the logic they provided or disagreed with it. I have certainly taken away with me many things that have shaped my views on knowledge and how it is conceived processed and presented. Socrates, Descartes, Plato, Locke, Pierce, James, Dewey, Garry, Code and all the others have successfully helped me explore the theories of epistemology, and from each person i take away something different. Whether it be arguments of truth and liberation or rationalism and skeptics i have learned that knowledge in my eyes is a little bit of all of these aspects put together. 


I believe we should think about knowledge as a process, it is not something that is instantly attained. It is a gradual development in mental growth throughout life.