Asked by Sweetpea
What Philosophy goes with these descriptions.
1. Creator of the Five Ways of proving God’s existence
2. A critic of the ontological argument
3. “God is dead” means there is no rational order.
4. Developer of an effective cosmological argument
5. Philosophers and scientists who supported logical positivism
6. Theists may accept the existence of God as a “basic belief.”
7. A passionate, nonintellectual commitment
8. Truth is subjective.
9. Developed three proofs of God
Sweetpea, please put YOUR answers in and we will be happy to proofread and make suggestions where you need to recheck. We do not do YOUR homework for you.
1. Creator of the Five Ways of proving God’s existence
2. A critic of the ontological argument
3. “God is dead” means there is no rational order.
4. Developer of an effective cosmological argument
5. Philosophers and scientists who supported logical positivism
6. Theists may accept the existence of God as a “basic belief.”
7. A passionate, nonintellectual commitment
8. Truth is subjective.
9. Developed three proofs of God
Sweetpea, please put YOUR answers in and we will be happy to proofread and make suggestions where you need to recheck. We do not do YOUR homework for you.
Answers
Answered by
Anonymous
God is dead” means there is no rational order.
Answered by
MICAH
FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE SAID "GOD IS DEAD"... AND THAT WAS HIS PHILOSOPHY
Answered by
pat
developer of an effective cosmological
argument
argument
Answered by
tate
Philosophers and scientists who supported logical positivism
Answered by
st. thomas aquinas
creator of the five ways of proving God;s existence
Answered by
danielle washington
"Merit" Essay
Pojman argues that we should strive to form a world in which "the virtuous are rewarded and the vicious punished in proportion to their relative deserts." Do you agree with Pojman that we deserve what we earn, or do you see problems with his stance? Form a cohesive, well-argued three-page paper in which you explore this question. Use specific examples, and support your arguments.
Pojman argues that we should strive to form a world in which "the virtuous are rewarded and the vicious punished in proportion to their relative deserts." Do you agree with Pojman that we deserve what we earn, or do you see problems with his stance? Form a cohesive, well-argued three-page paper in which you explore this question. Use specific examples, and support your arguments.
There are no AI answers yet. The ability to request AI answers is coming soon!
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.