Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of Sigmund Freud in the field of psychology
Contribution of sigmund freud to the study of psychology
The role of Sigmund Freud in the field of psychology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The role of Sigmund Freud in the field of psychology
Matthew March 29th, 2014 Belief and Unbelief in the Modern World Professor Jacobs Mid-Term Examination Long Answer 1. Explain the Analogical (Proper Proportionality) and Metaphorical approaches to speaking about God, giving an example of each. Make sure that you explain how each avoids the use of literal or direct language about God. When speaking about God, we naturally tend to give God characteristics or attributes that otherwise would be considered un proper. Two approaches that we use when speaking about God are Analogical and Metaphorical. Analogical and Metaphorical approaches are all about giving attribution to thing, in this case God. There are three predications, univocal, equivocal, and analogy. The univocal approach talks about the same term for different subjects that have the same exact meaning. The equivocal approach takes the same term, but it has a different subject and meaning. An analogy is a comparison of two things, in this case God is going to be compared to different things. The analogical approach is also called proper proportionality. When speaking about God in the analogical (proper proportionality) approach, we use the same term, but a different subject. For the metaphorical approach when speaking about God, we compare God to something and give him characteristics that he would not normally have. For example, when talking about proper proportionality, I may say that God is heroic. Now God is heroic may seem simple, but if I replace God with the word George Washington, now I have George Washington is heroic. While George Washington may have been heroic, comparing him to God using the same term gives me a different proportion. Now when I talk about the Metaphorical approach of God, I am ... ... middle of paper ... ... God. I believe Sigmund Freud would than answer that things go on in our brains like superego, ego, and id that are undetected and unexplained causing us not to have to think of something greater. I believe Anselm would close up the argument by saying if something only exists in your mind, can you think of something greater that only exists in you mind. I believe Anselm and Sigmund Freud would stop talking after a brief conversation because they would both be so stubborn on their views. Anselm's argument is convincing in that it has logic behind it, while Freud's is just contradicting the saying God exists. Both Sigmund Freud and Anselm pose good arguments, and I believe a conversation between the two would have gone how I described it. Anselm and Freud both believe in their arguments and their conversation would have been short lived because of it.
Metaphors can be defined as those concepts where a term is used to portray a different meaning in a phrase than what it literary means. Additionally, metaphors are also used to make rhetorical statements where one is speaking of something else but by the use of words that do not have the same meaning. Moreover, metaphors can be used when one is trying to compare two different items with different meanings to portray the same meaning in describing something (Arduini 83). The book “Their eyes were watching God” has several metaphors, which have different analyses.
5. I think his analogy working because in many ways they are similar. He does a good job of reinserting that analogy throughout the essay so that the reader is reminded of it. He also consistently explains the analogy rather than just stating the
the mind could gain an idea about God, but instead, humans could think about God
God is like a father and we, humanity are his children. He teaches us, prepares us, disciplines us, and punishes us for not obeying and following His commands. The attributes of God that belong distinctly to him are that
What is figurative language? Figurative language is saying something other than what is meant for effect. For example a metaphor, simile, symbol, hyperbole or personification. In the sermon called Sinners in the Hand of an Angry God and the Iroquois Constitution there is a lot of figurative language.
In the words of Anselm, "Therefore, Lord, not only are You that than which nothing greater can be conceived but you are also something greater than can be conceived. Indeed, since it is possible to be conceived to be something of this kind, if you are not this very thing, something can be conceived greater than You, which cannot be done. " Anselm suggested a proof for God's existence, however, for God to be God there must be more to Him than that He simply 'exists'.
Importantly, the Fool must be able to understand the idea of “that than which nothing greater can be thought” without yet conceding that God exists. By contemplating the phrase “that than which nothing greater can be thought,” the Fool generates an idea of God that ultimately requires him to accept that God exists. To be clear, Anselm is not arguing that God depends upon the Fool’s ideas, but rather that the way in which we go about conceiving of God as “that than which nothing greater can be thought” reveals that He must exist. In an analogous conceptual process, we understand that circles are necessarily round after learning the definition of a circle. Likewise, we understand that God exists after learning what constitutes “that than which nothing greater can be thought.” In this way, the mind plays an active role in this argument because it is the tool by which one can reveal the necessity of God’s
Consider your childhood. Who were your role models? How did they influence you throughout your adolescent years? Now contemplate the following: What might have occurred if they were absent throughout the entire duration of one or more essential moments wherein you placed your undivided trust onto them, the person in your life you had always believed would be there for you. What would your reaction be? For the children described within the stories “The Metaphor” and “The Father”, the response is skepticism, which leads to the idea that within these texts, a central theme is displayed which addresses the idea that children may inherently turn to cynicism in response to the neglectful actions perpetrated by their parents during childhood.
He supports this argument by introducing the concept of a painter. “When a painter first conceives of what he will afterwards make, he has it in his understanding, but he does not yet understand it to be, because he has not yet made it. But after he has made the painting, he both has it in his understanding and he understands that it exists, because he has made it.” This proves that to exist in the understanding, is different from existing in reality. Anselm then points out that in the case of god, to exist in reality, is much greater than to exist only in the understanding. But this means that it is contradictory to deny that god exists in reality. This is because a person cannot state that a being which “nothing greater can be perceived” does not exist in reality, for this raises the contradiction that if this being did not exist, then they are able to perceive that a greater being exists. Which in result one is demonstrating the concept of god “a being that which nothing greater can be conceived” This then supports Anselm’s argument that God is greatest in all ways, so he must
One common perception of God is that God is not so much a being, but according to seventeenth century philosopher Benedict Spinoza, that "God is everything, identical to the universe itself." That is to say that God is a part of all humans, all animals, all objects, and all matter in the universe. This particular view is called pantheism, which is literally defined to mean that there is no God, but only the combined forces and laws that are manifested in the existing universe. According to Spinoza, we are each and all an integral part of God, not as individuals or even humanity as a whole but as an integral part of what Spinoza called the "One Substance." He also believed that we are each and all components of some greater being, a being so unimaginably large that we are each nothing more than tiny parcels of matter in that being's blood.
In works based on the Christian religion God is often portrayed as all-knowing and all-powerful. This is how God is portrayed
One of the character description of God that I enjoyed in the Bible include, God is good.God is good- He freed the Israelites from slavery and into the Promise land. In addition, He prepared laws and scriptures to help the Israelites in their walk with Him. In the book of Exodus the Lord shows his mercy for the Israelites and their situation. The Lord also showed his power to the people of Egypt in the attempt to free his people. I can clearly see that He will do anything to show His
St. Anselm of Canterbury defined God as “that-than-which-a-greater-cannot-be-thought” (Bailey, 2002). The problem with this definition is that the term ‘greater’ is surely up for interpretation. The term ‘greater’ requires a comparison between itself and one or more things, which could pose a problem for Anselm’s argument; however Professor Thorp states that the only difference between these two things is that one exists in the mind, while the other exists in the mind and in reality. If we understand that a God that exists in the mind and in reality is greater than one that merely exists in the mind then we must understand that God exists. We need to examine this, however, much more closely to discover the problem with this statement; and I will do so using an example given to us by Professor Thorp.
Anselm’s argument for the existence of God is quite simple. He first proclaims that humans can grasp in their mind “something than which nothing greater can be thought” (Anselm 7). This “something” is an all-perfect God. Then, Anselm states that, if the all-perfect God existed only in thought, then something greater than the the all-perfect God can be conceived, namely, an all-perfect God that exists in reality. And
Now we believe that you are something than which nothing greater can be imagined (Anselm).” In this part of his argument, Anselm is stating that a person’s beliefs are stronger than people could ever know. Anselm argued that if one must believe in God, who is a person that greater than we can ever imagine. In this part of his argument, he begins that God is more powerful that anyone can imagine. There is no better being that God he is the most powerful being of all time. There are many followers who choose to believe God without any proof or any type of “hard,” evidence, but since they believe that God is real God does