PHI-215-HW 3

docx

School

Randolph Community College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

215

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by ElderPuppyPerson872

PHI-215:Homework 3 Hailey Sattenfield What is the difference between “objective truth” and “subjective truth”? Notice that for Kierkegaard, the subjective truth is, first, a belief that is “true for me” and, second, a belief that expresses an “idea for which I can live and die” or expresses an idea that has “significance for me and my life.” So based on these two features of subjective truth, what would “objective truth” be? - In the philosophy of Kierkegaard, there is a distinction between "objective truth" and "subjective truth." Subjective truth, according to Kierkegaard, is a belief that is "true for me" and holds personal significance in one's life. It is a belief that one can live and die for, expressing an idea that has deep meaning and relevance to an individual's existence. On the other hand, objective truth refers to truths that are independent of personal perspectives or individual experiences. It is often associated with scientific facts or universal principles that are true regardless of personal beliefs or interpretations. Kierkegaard emphasizes the importance of subjective truth, as it involves a personal commitment and engagement with one's beliefs. It goes beyond mere intellectual understanding and involves a passionate inwardness, a dedication to an idea that shapes one's consciousness and way of life. While objective truth may involve the pursuit of knowledge and understanding, Kierkegaard argues that subjective truth holds greater significance for an individual's existence. It is through subjective truth that one finds personal meaning, purpose, and a sense of fulfillment in life. Describe some beliefs you hold that you would say are subjective truths, and some that you would say are objective truths. Kierkegaard says that subjective truths are more important than objective truths. Do you feel the same way? Why? - Some beliefs that i have that would be subjective truths include my religious standpoint, my ethics and moral values, and just a strive to be better in everything i do. Objective truths are more just facts that i believe in, life every living thing needs water and oxygen to stay living. I do believe that subjective truths are more important than objective. Subjective truths are what makes each person different. Their morals, values, and beliefs all shape each person into someone different: it bleeds into their personality and makes them who they are. Theologian Paul Tillich says that the traditional proofs for the existence of God encourage us to see God as “an invincible tyrant.” Explain why he probably believes that the proofs would lead people to see God in this way. Do you agree? - According to Paul Tillich, the traditional proofs for the existence of God can lead people to see God as "an invincible tyrant." Tillich argues that these proofs,

which often rely on logical arguments and rational demonstrations, can create a perception of God as an all-powerful and all-knowing being who deprives individuals of their subjectivity and freedom. Tillich criticizes the traditional medieval philosophical theology, which tends to understand God as the highest existing being to which various attributes like omnipotence, omniscience, and goodness are ascribed. He believes that this understanding of God as a being limits the true nature of God and fails to capture the depth and complexity of the divine. Instead, Tillich proposes an ontological view of God as being itself, the ground of being, and the power of being. He suggests that God is beyond essence and existence, and should not be confined to the limitations of being understood as a being. By emphasizing the ontological implications of finitude, Tillich argues for a deeper understanding of God that goes beyond traditional proofs and objectifying conceptions. I do believe that this holds at least some truth. From my religious background and beliefs, I believe that there is no way to “understand” God. We, as humans, have tried to mold His being into something that we can objectify and understand, however, I don't think it is possible to fully know or fully understand God. Explain what Tillich thinks a person’s “ultimate concern” is. Describe what your own “ultimate concern” (or concerns) is at this point in your life. - Paul Tillich defines "ultimate concern" as the deepest and most fundamental commitment or orientation that shapes a person's life. It is the ultimate meaning or purpose that individuals attach to their existence, the core value or ideal that gives their lives coherence and significance. According to Tillich, every person has an ultimate concern, whether they are aware of it or not. It is the driving force behind their actions, decisions, and priorities. It can be religious, philosophical, moral, or even existential. The ultimate concern represents the ultimate reality or ground of being that individuals seek to align themselves with and orient their lives toward. Tillich argues that when a person's ultimate concern is fully realized, it brings a sense of fulfillment, purpose, and meaning to their life. It is the source of their highest values and provides a framework for understanding their existence and engaging with the world. For me, I think my “ultimate concern” currently is striving for a cause bigger than myself. I don't know what that cause is, necessarily, and I can't exactly explain why I do it, but I know there is something greater that I am a part of, and because of that, I strive to be better in everything I do, think, or say. Do you think Mary Daly is right to claim that the traditional Western concepts of God and religion are so sexist they should be discarded, or do you think Pamela Young is right that traditional religious concepts and practices can be reformed?

- Mary Daly, a feminist theologian, argued that the traditional Western concepts of God and religion are deeply rooted in sexism and should be discarded. She believed that these concepts perpetuate androcentrism, which is the belief in the superiority of men over women, and reinforce patriarchal power structures within society. Pamela Young, another scholar, holds a different perspective. She believes that traditional religious concepts and practices can be reformed to address the issues of sexism and gender inequality. Young argues that while elements of Christianity may seem to reinforce traditional gender roles and female oppression, there is potential for reform and progress within religious traditions. Mary Daly's perspective emphasizes the need for a radical departure from traditional religious frameworks due to their inherent sexism and androcentrism. On the other hand, Pamela Young argues for the potential for reform within religious traditions to address issues of gender inequality. I think that there are truths to both of their perspectives. Daly is right in saying that some traditional religious rituals need to go. I don't think that everything as a whole needs to be gotten rid of though. Like Young, I believe that some things could be reformed to better suit equality.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

PHI-215-HW 3

Related Documents