William Paley’s and Peter Inwagen’s versions.
2. Present the Argument from Design in both William Paley’s and Peter Inwagen’s versions. Explain how Inwagen’s argument differs from Paley’s. Then, explain Russell’s criticism of the Argument from Design found in Why I am not a Christian. Remember, they are not merely giving opinions. They are offering arguments. So, your presentation should include the problems, the solutions to the problems, and the arguments.
3. Explain the Problem of Evil and the arguments on each side as presented by B. C. Johnson and Peter Inwagen. Do not merely give summaries of each. Present the problem and explain why Johnson believes that this undermines a belief in the existence of God. Then explain Inwagen’s solution to the problem of evil. Include Inwagen’s arguments against other attempts to show that the existence of God is incompatible with the existence of evil, making sure to explain the problems. Finally, explain Bertrand Russell’s moral critique of Christianity and its relationship to the problem of evil. Remember, they are not merely giving opinions. So, your presentation should include the problems, the responses to the problems that the authors are criticizing, the authors’ solutions to the problems, and their arguments.
4. Blaise Pascal claims that it is rational to believe in God even with a lack of evidence. Bertrand Russell claims that it is irrational to believe in continued existence after death, undermining Pascal’s argument and that a belief in God is based on irrational (emotional) factors, such as fear and childraising, also providing reasons to question Pascal’s argument. Explain, including the objections and replies by Lycan and Schlesingerand making clear how Russell’s arguments apply to a critique of Pascal. Russell’s arguments are found in both articles we read.
