I’m trying to learn for my Philosophy class and I’m stuck. Can you help?
1. St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas both attempt to provide philosophical proofs for the existence of God. While they agree that God exists and can be proven to exist philosophically (i.e., not as a matter of religious faith), they take very different philosophical routes to this conclusion. Briefly explain this methodological difference. Which general strategy strikes you as more promising or interesting?
2. In different ways, Rene Descartes and David Hume each focus their philosophical projects on the theme of human knowledge, each taking a critical (perhaps even a skeptical) view of human capabilities. Contrast the skeptical approaches of Descartes and Hume. Which one impressed you more? What role does God play in these approaches?
0 comments