1. Define the theistic response to life’s meaning. What are potential objections to it?
Theistic Response: Humans life has meaning because humans are part of a plan or providential order devised by God. Thus everything has value and purpose.
Objections:
Does a God or some kind of divine really exists.
Humans cannot be limited to being a gadget/means to an end.
Illogical, because if purpose was relevant this doesn't mean your life has a meaning.
2. Define the Meaning and Human Progress response to life’s meaning. What are potential objections to it?
Meaning and Human Progress Response: Life has meaning IF it is related to something more significant than the individual.
Objections:
Is there progress?
In the name of progress have we deteriorated in the environment?
Why should one agree to these goals if they do…show more content… If the whole universe has no meaning we should never have found out that is has no meaning..”
6. Does it matter whether or not life has meaning? If life is fun or of you are happy should you bother asking about life's meaning? Explain.
If you were looking for a technical answer, then no. A worldly answer would be, you are your own and live life how you want to.
A theistic response would be, it does matter. However from my doctrine I am not here to convert nor am I to expect my words to change an opinion. That is not my place to do so, but I do think that question allows for us to have conversations like these.
The following questions all relate to the video of William Lane Craig. Craig is a Christian philosopher and public apologist. Answer the following questions in complete sentences.
1. Craig argues that it is inconsistent to say that on the one hand life has no objective meaning, but that on the other hand one may construct one’s own meaning for one’s life. What are his reasons for saying that those claims are inconsistent with one another? Do you think he’s right about them being inconsistent with one
