What is your answer?
Ima Supernaturalist argues that supernaturalism must be true -- since all basic laws of every sort depend on God's will. Which of these is the best objection to her argument?
{ 1 } - Supernaturalism doesn't hold that all basic moral laws depend on God's will.
{ 2 } - From the premise "All basic laws of every sort depend on God's will" we can't validly conclude "All basic moral laws depend on God's will."
{ 3 } - There were moral laws before the Bible even existed.
{ 4 } - Even if we assume that there's a God, still it's doubtful that all basic laws depend on God's will.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 4.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
Ima Supernaturalist argues that supernaturalism must be true -- since all basic laws of every sort depend on God's will. Which of these is the best objection to her argument?
{ 1 } - Supernaturalism doesn't hold that all basic moral laws depend on God's will.
{ 2 } - From the premise "All basic laws of every sort depend on God's will" we can't validly conclude "All basic moral laws depend on God's will."
{ 3 } - There were moral laws before the Bible even existed.
{ 4 } - Even if we assume that there's a God, still it's doubtful that all basic laws depend on God's will.
It does hold this!
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
Ima Supernaturalist argues that supernaturalism must be true -- since all basic laws of every sort depend on God's will. Which of these is the best objection to her argument?
{ 1 } - Supernaturalism doesn't hold that all basic moral laws depend on God's will.
{ 2 } - From the premise "All basic laws of every sort depend on God's will" we can't validly conclude "All basic moral laws depend on God's will."
{ 3 } - There were moral laws before the Bible even existed.
{ 4 } - Even if we assume that there's a God, still it's doubtful that all basic laws depend on God's will.
Yes we can!
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is wrong. Please try again.
Ima Supernaturalist argues that supernaturalism must be true -- since all basic laws of every sort depend on God's will. Which of these is the best objection to her argument?
{ 1 } - Supernaturalism doesn't hold that all basic moral laws depend on God's will.
{ 2 } - From the premise "All basic laws of every sort depend on God's will" we can't validly conclude "All basic moral laws depend on God's will."
{ 3 } - There were moral laws before the Bible even existed.
{ 4 } - Even if we assume that there's a God, still it's doubtful that all basic laws depend on God's will.
They might still depend on God's will.
<= back | menu | forward =>
4 is correct!
Ima Supernaturalist argues that supernaturalism must be true -- since all basic laws of every sort depend on God's will. Which of these is the best objection to her argument?
{ 1 } - Supernaturalism doesn't hold that all basic moral laws depend on God's will.
{ 2 } - From the premise "All basic laws of every sort depend on God's will" we can't validly conclude "All basic moral laws depend on God's will."
{ 3 } - There were moral laws before the Bible even existed.
{ 4 } - Even if we assume that there's a God, still it's doubtful that all basic laws depend on God's will.
Is the logical truth "x=x" true because of God's will -- so that it would have been false if God had willed otherwise? The law seems true of its very nature, and not true because God made it true. Maybe basic moral laws are the same. Maybe hatred is inherently evil, and not just evil because God made it so.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
the end