Soft materialists agree to a point but their key belief is that everything emerges from the physical, but this doesn’t necessarily mean that everything can be reduced to the physical. They would argue that material is the base of everything and the mind emerges from the material - this is backed up by the example that while there would be no thoughts without brains, thoughts can’t be simply reduced to the brain as a material object. Gilbert Ryle is an advocate of Materialism and argues that talking of the soul is a ‘category mistake’. He argues that the soul is not a quantifiable phenomena that can be
This postulate of God has origin in one’s own reason which would necessarily mean that submitting to will of God is submitting to one’s own reason. The need of God arises because the relationship between moral law and happiness is not guaranteed in this world. So here God comes to the rescue and thus necessitates the compatibility of virtue and realization of highest good. The postulate of immortality is very much interwoven with the postulate of God. Taking into account the sensuous nature of human beings, Kant states that it is very difficult for a man to be righteous without hope.
Examine the ways in which the ontological argument attempts to prove to the atheist God exists. The ontological argument is an a priori argument which means that the argument is based around logic as oppose to experience. This means that the argument attempts to prove to atheists that God exists through deductive reasoning which means that if you accept the premises of the argument to be true then it is logical to accept the conclusion they reach. The argument is therefore analytic as it is based upon a definition and does not need to refer to empirical evidence to solve it. Aristotle uses the analogy of “All men are mortal, Socrates is a man, and therefore Socrates is mortal”, if you accept that premises of the statement “Socrates is a man” to be true, then the conclusion is necessarily true.
Hume used the inductive method, which goes from the particular to the universal. Hume believes that knowledge is likely. Descartes believed in the existence of innate ideas in man, undeniable truths and safe, but Hume denies, since for him the human mind at birth is like a blank book in which you type through the experience (Spicker, 2000). Rationalism is a philosophical theory which originates in the thought of Descartes (1596-1650, French philosopher). Do not forget either that rationalism did not involve the overcoming of religious thought; on the contrary, the notion of God was very important in the rationalist philosophical systems (Joachim, 2006).
Therefore, which of these two concepts is more logically coherent? Some would say that reincarnation is entirely more logical than resurrection. As Descartes suggests, if body and soul divide into two categories the body is admittedly perishable and this idea is therefore constant as we have evidence that corpses remain on earth. The possibility of a separate soul is also plausible and difficult to dispute therefore the soul is constant and as Plato suggests a direct link to the form of life, suggesting that the soul must live eternally in some form, as it is unable to die. This is more possible than the idea of resurrection because the souls is not dependent on the body, the theory of reincarnation is logical in saying that the soul passes consistently through this world, entering a different flesh form.
Explain different ideas about the existence of the soul and its relationship with the body Dualism is the idea that the mind and body are two separate substances; it is possible to survive death, as the soul disembodies. Human beings consist of both physical bodies and non physical minds and that the mind is the essence of a person. Plato was a dualist. He believed that the soul and the body are two separate substances that interact. The real identity of the person lies with the soul.
In Phaedo Socrates argues the nature of the afterlife with Cebes and Simmias, in order to show that there is an afterlife he devises convincing arguments about immortality of the soul and the existence of afterlife. Socrates claims that the death is nothing more than the separation of the soul from the body. The soul is immortal considering the cycle of life and death, the idea of recollection and the affinity argument. And while Socrates’ arguments are controversial, they appear reasonable and consistent with the idea of immortality of the soul is in fact true. Socrates’ first argument is based on the idea of dialectics and the cycle of life and death.
Additionally, Diotima said that Socrates had mistaken the idea of love with the beloved. “…I conclude that you thought Love was being loved, rather than being a lover. I think that’s why Love struck you as beautiful in every way: because it is what is really beautiful and graceful that deserves to be loved…”(Plato, 204C). Therefore, Diotima argued that Love is outside of us and always of ‘something’. Furthermore, Diotima stated that the soul was mortal because people strive to be immortal by having their qualities survive in their offspring.
"The unconscious is not a concept, it is a rhetorical device." Thus wrote Stanley Fish in his article, "Withholding the Missing Portion". Fish's article argues that Freud's primary concern in his writings is to convince the reader of the strength of his interpretations and the validity of his theory through his clever use of rhetoric. In particular, Fish refers to the rôle of the unconscious in Freud's theory, arguing that it can be freely manipulated by Freud in such a way that it can appear to account for any data acquired in practice. This attitude reflects the commonly-held view amongst contemporary scientists that Freud's theories are unscientific.
Augustine’s soul deciding theodicy was the demonstration that God is not responsible for the existence of evil. A theodicy is a Greek term which means to justify God and that is what Augustine tried to do. Augustine stated that there is no such thing or substance as Evil but the idea of evil stems from the absence of goodness and our human free will which is central to being truly good. God created all things ex nihilo, from nothing, so it is impossible for evil to exist as a substance. Augustine said that “Evil stemmed from the free fallible choices of beings…in the pre-history of time,” referring to the free will of Adam and Eve and the Fallen Angels.