Tafacorian Thoughts

The Incompatible Properties Argument(s) by T.M. Drange

Logic, Philosophy of Religion May 15, 2020 Leave a comment

[This article was originally published by Dr. Theodore Drange in Philo 1998 (2), pp. 49-60. It has been re-purposed here, eliminating most of Drange’s accompanying comments to anticipated objections. The intention here is just to provide the outlines of his argument(s) in their logical form(s) and promote awareness of the argument’s overall strength.]

Atheological arguments (arguments for the nonexistence of God) can be divided into two main groups. One group consists of arguments which aim to show an incompatibility between two of God’s properties. Let us call those “incompatible-properties arguments.” The other group consists of arguments which aim to show an incompatibility between God’s existence and the nature of the world. They may be called “God-vs.-world arguments.” A prime example of one of those would be the Evidential Argument from Evil. This paper will only survey arguments in the first group. Arguments in the second group are discussed elsewhere.[1]

To generate incompatible-properties arguments, it would be most helpful to have a list of divine attributes. I suggest the following. God is:

(a) perfect (g) personal

(b) immutable (h) free

(c) transcendent (i) all-loving

(d) nonphysical (j) all-just

(e) omniscient (k) all-merciful

(f) omnipresent (l) the creator of the universe

Continue reading →

A Glance at the Social Structure of Western Medicine

Bioethics, Legal Philosophy, Metaethics, Social and Political Philosophy May 2, 2020 Leave a comment

In Western medicine, just as in law, religion, and the military, there is a single group located above all others at the top of this social institution. This group is an authoritative minority endowed with certain privileges/rights/duties/obligations and, subsequently, they are required to fulfill certain roles. This group is, of course, composed of physicians.

Continue reading →

Moral Reasoning in the Context of Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS)

Bioethics, Legal Philosophy, Social and Political Philosophy April 21, 2020 Leave a comment

A Statement of Values — Proponents versus Opponents

Collectively, the proponents of physician assisted suicide value personal autonomy and responsibility, the quality of life, and compassion towards others. Proponents of physician assisted suicide feel that by being allowed to choose between life and death as a personal and medical decision, patients are able to exercise personal autonomy, a freedom that they take to be fundamental to the nature of humanity. This autonomy ties directly into their perceptions about quality of life, in that some view life as undesirable or lackluster if they are not able to enjoy activities, events, and relationships that they previously did due to terminal or incurable medical conditions. They do not view life as inherently valuable and worth living, but derive life’s value from its pragmatic and functional elements. When the level and intensity of physical and mental suffering crosses a certain threshold, these proponents value the actions of those who will show compassion and act in accordance with their final wishes. Thus, proponents of physician assisted suicide feel obligated to protect the personal rights of patients as well as to ensure that they are being treated with compassion to alleviate their pain and suffering. Any events or legislation that interfere with those conditions are intolerable.

Continue reading →