Answer questions with one paragraph each: Chapter 4 1. Compare, contrast, and evaluate the views of John Searle and Rene Descartes on dualism. 2. Compare, contrast, and evaluate the views of George Berkeley and Thomas Hobbes on the mind. 3. Explain and evaluate what David Hume means by saying that we have no evidence of the self. 4. How is Hume’s view of the mind related to that of the Tibetan Master Milarepa’s on this subject? Chapter 5 5. Explain, compare, and contrast the views of Anselm and Gaunilo regarding the Ontological argument. 6. Explain, contrast, and evaluate the views of Freud and Nietzsche, on the rationality of religious belief. 7. Explain, compare, and evaluate the views of Tolstoy and Kierkegaard, on the rationality of religious belief. 8. Explain and evaluate Pascal’s Wager. Would belief based on such an argument get you into heaven? 9. Explain and evaluate William Paley’s version of the design argument. Does the argument provide a rational basis for belief in some sort of creative intelligence behind the universe and life? 10. Explain and evaluate the problem of evil. Chapter 6 11. Compare and contrast the main tenets of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism. 12. Explain in detail the connection between the Tao, Ying, and Yang. 13. Articulate how principles of Taoism serve as the foundation of the art of Feng Shui. 14. Explain and evaluate the views of Sogyal Rinpoche regarding death and human activity in the modern world ( from the readings at the end of chapter 6). 15. Consider and explain the evidence for reincarnation and the experience of other levels of reality presented in the chapter.
John Searle and Rene Descartes hold different views on dualism. Descartes believed in mind-body dualism, where the mind and body are separate entities that interact with each other. Searle, on the other hand, rejected this view and argued for biological naturalism, where the mind is a product of the brain’s biological processes. Searle criticized Descartes’ view, arguing that the mind cannot be a non-physical substance since it cannot be explained or studied scientifically. While Descartes believed that the mind is distinct from the body and can survive after death, Searle believed that the mind is entirely dependent on the body and ceases to exist after death.
George Berkeley and Thomas Hobbes had different views on the mind. Berkeley believed that the mind and its ideas are the only reality, while Hobbes argued that everything, including the mind, can be reduced to material entities. Berkeley held that objects only exist when they are perceived, while Hobbes believed that everything exists independently of perception. Berkeley believed that the mind can have direct access to God, while Hobbes believed that the idea of God is a product of human imagination. Overall, Berkeley held a more idealistic view of the mind, while Hobbes held a more materialistic view.
David Hume believed that we have no evidence of the self. He argued that the self is not a thing that can be observed or experienced, but rather a collection of perceptions that arise and pass away constantly. He claimed that when we introspect, we only see a succession of perceptions, not a self that persists over time. Hume believed that the self is an illusion created by the mind, and that our beliefs about the self are based on habit and imagination rather than evidence.
Hume’s view of the mind is related to that of the Tibetan Master Milarepa in that both hold a non-dualistic view of the mind. Milarepa believed that the mind is not a substance or entity but a process that arises from causes and conditions. He believed that the mind is not inherently existent and that it is empty of any intrinsic nature. Like Hume, Milarepa believed that the self is an illusion and that our beliefs about the self are based on ignorance and delusion.
Anselm and Gaunilo had different views regarding the Ontological argument. Anselm argued that God is the greatest conceivable being, and that existence is a necessary attribute of such a being. Gaunilo criticized Anselm’s argument, arguing that it could be used to prove the existence of any imaginary being, such as a perfect island. He believed that the Ontological argument was flawed because it relied on a faulty definition of God.
Freud and Nietzsche had different views on the rationality of religious belief. Freud believed that religion is a projection of our deepest desires and fears and that it serves as a way to cope with the uncertainties and anxieties of life. Nietzsche, on the other hand, believed that religion is a product of a slave morality that seeks to suppress individuality and creativity. He believed that religion is a form of nihilism that denies the world and seeks to escape from it.
Tolstoy and Kierkegaard had different views on the rationality of religious belief. Tolstoy believed that religion is rational because it provides a way to live a meaningful and fulfilling life. He believed that the teachings of Jesus offer a solution to the problem of meaninglessness and despair. Kierkegaard, on the other hand, believed that religious belief is irrational and requires a leap of faith. He believed that faith involves a commitment to the absurd and the paradoxical, and that it cannot be justified by reason.
