Search

Can atheistic explanations scientifically explain the world and humans? Can theistic deductive arguments provide a rational explanation of the world? Many philosophers of contemporary religion believe that deductive arguments for the existence of God are invalid because they are either deductively invalid or based on one or more false or uncertain premises. Hence, they turned to non-analogical arguments about the existence of God. The purpose of this paper is to examine and evaluate one of these interesting new arguments, the Swinburne inductive argument. This research paper is a library-based theoretical analysis that is done through the concepts, propositions, and arguments. Swinburne claims that humanistic and materialistic explanations cannot explain the world and humans. In contrast, he has three arguments for the existence of the universe, the existence of scientific laws, and the laws of the process of evolution; He uses the existence of God as three affirmative inductive arguments and concludes the accumulation of theism as the best explanation. The result of such arguments is that theism can be the ultimate explanation of the world. It will also be shown that such arguments are less challenging and can greatly increase the likelihood of God's existence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent decades, Functionalism has become a standard approach towards philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Functionalism is inspired by computer science and against prior theories about mind. Functionalism takes mind as a processor and body as a provider of raw data for this processor. Mind with the help of mental algorithms translates perceptional data to symbolic representations as concepts of objects and events. According to some philosophers, this leads to problems like the problem of meaning. In this paper, with an analytical approach, Embodiment is proposed as a solution to these problems. According to Embodied Mind, regarding the body as a mere machine is the root of all problems in Functionalism. Embodied mind is consisting of three pars: 1. Perception-Motor system which presents meaningful perception of objects and events to the mind. 2. Conceptualization system which unites information provided by perceptionmotor system. 3. Metaphors, processes in mind, which enable us to think and talk about everyday and mathematical concepts and meta-language. These are processes, mainly unconscious, in mind for understanding concepts. Embodied Mind rejects the idea of body as mere machine and mind as a brain processes. It also rejects symbolic representations as concepts. Concepts are simulators of objects and events, rooting in interaction between body and the world. Human as an Embodied Being exist in the world and interact with it and this is what makes sense of concepts in mind. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There could be various comparative studies between Kant and Kierkegaard on fields like human knowledge, ethics, faith, art, etc. This paper aims to compare the two philosopher's epistemology through their writings. The main common ground of Kant's and Kierkegaard's epistemology is their belief in the idea of a "fissure" between theory and practice, which constitutes the core of their contemplations on human knowledge. This article shows that Kant's theory of knowledge paved the way for Kierkegaard to describe his notions of the "fissure" between being and thought. Thus, it will be shown that Kant and Kierkegaard have been led to believe in the finitude of human beings in knowledge by this split. Then, it will be demonstrated that Kierkegaard, following Kant, distinguishes "being" from "essence" and "actuality" from "ideality". Finally, we argue that Kant's critique of the traditional proofs of God's existence anticipates Kierkegaard's conflict with natural theology and his idea that traditional demonstrations are useless for a believer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite Wittgenstein's philosophical activities in Britain and his strong inclination towards analytic philosophy, there are also non-analytic elements in his thought which are rooted in classical German thought, especially in Kant's critical philosophy. We can, therefore, detect Kantian elements in Wittgenstein's thought. Concerning the main aim of this research, i.e., to show the Kantian veins of Wittgenstein's thought, the following elements can be enumerated: critique of Metaphysics, delimitation of expression of thought, transcendentality of logic and ethics, problem of Metaphysics and science, refutation of private language. Given the evolution of Wittgenstein's though, this paper aims to show that, first, these similarities and parallels can be drawn not only from the Tractatus but also from the Philosophical Investigations. Second, there are fundamental differences between Wittgenstein's commentators, for instance, P.M.S Hacker argues against the transcendental reading of both the Tractatus and the Philosophical Investigations, and claims that the two philosophers do not share the same concept of the term transcendental. Finally, the question arises as to whether these Kantian veins can be considered as a proof of the unity of Wittgenstein's thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the emergence of modernity, and in response to its myriad aspects and potentials, which are constantly unfolding, countless reactions have kept emerging in almost all quarters of the globe. A large variety of anti-modern reactions, the common core of which is perhaps the idea that modernity, in one way or another, is illegitimate, stand out among these responses. According to some of these anti-modern responses, modernity has usurped the characteristics and features of religion, which has been the soul as well as the main shaping force of the pre-modern era and has reproduced it in a corrupted form. Two German-speaking philosophers, Karl Popper and Hans Blumenberg, are among the intellectuals who have defended modernity against the onslaught of anti-modern tendencies. In this paper, I briefly, though critically, compare and contrast the approaches as well as some of the arguments of these two thinkers in defence of modernity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]