Life after Death- Hick and Calvin

Life after death is a big topic but I found it helpful to break it down into smaller sections. There were 4 key thinkers in this section:
- Plato
- Aristotle
- John Calvin
- John Hick

John Hick and John Calvin both had ideas about life after death. Calvin believed in Divine Election (very similar to predestination) and Hick came up with his replica theory. These ideas are very important to remember for the exam. 

John Calvin

Calvin believed strongly in the idea of Divine Election. Basically God chooses the elect, and our actions in life show whether or not we are part of the elect God has chosen. For example a murderer obviously isn't part of the elect chosen by God as their actions would suggest they aren't. This does seem to take away free will which is a huge issue for many people. It would appear to follow a more determinist pathway than traditional Christian beliefs. There is some evidence in the Bible to support Calvin; in the Book of Revelation reference is made to the 144,000 servants who are saved. It is important though to remember that the Bible can be interpreted in many different ways, and the historical context also needs to be taken into account. 

John Hick

Hick came up with the replica theory to try and explain how we could be resurrected. He stated that we are "psycho-somatic units", meaning that the body and soul cannot be separated. Due to this belief that the body and soul can't be separated Hick was a monist. Hick thought that the resurrection was a Divine Action, in which God makes an exact replica of a person. This could happen straight after death or after a time lapse decided by God. To help explain his ideas Hick came up with an analogy:

If a person disappears in London the reappears in New York they have to be the same to be identifiable. The arrangement of their matter can't have changed. If you then change this to somebody dying in London then an exact replica exists in New York it would be easier to identify the replica than the dead person. 

Hick was adamant that there is only one replica, as otherwise you cannot be an individual. 

Problems with Hick 

• Identification with the real person- Some people think that physical continuity is important.

         Hick argued that the replica is the same as it has the same "consciousness, memory,

         emotion and volition" 

• Are illnesses (terminal) replicated? 

         Hick argued that healing takes place in the existence of the replica. 

• Can there be multiple replicas? If there are individuality could be lost

          Hick completely rejected this argument as he thought there could only be 

          one replica.

John Hick

Calvinism- predestination 

Life After Death- Plato and Aristotle

Life after death is a big topic but I found it helpful to break it down into smaller sections. There were 4 key thinkers in this section:
- Plato
- Aristotle
- John Calvin
- John Hick

Aristotle and Plato were Greek philosophers who influenced much of Western philosophy. They both had very different ideas on the soul and how it relates to the body. Plato was a dualist, and Aristotle was a monist. This is very important when it comes to life after death, as it can determine whether or not they believed in an afterlife. 


Plato and Dualism

Plato believed in dualism. This means that the body and soul are separate, so if the body dies the soul could continue to an afterlife. The soul and the body have different desires, which means the body could distract the soul. Also the mind and soul are separate, Plato explained this using an analogy:

The soul is the driver of a chariot. It directs the two horses pulling the chariot; the body and the mind. They pull in different directions but the soul tries to keep them together and in harmony. 

  Plato had two arguments for proving the souls existence: 

• Argument from Opposites: Everything in life appears to have an opposite, e.g light has dark, hot and cold, and, for Plato, life and death. Death cannot be nothing as then life wouldn't have an opposite, the soul must be able to experience death and so must exist. This would support reincarnation as there is an endless cycle of opposites, life and death continue. Plato himself thought that tyrants were reincarnated as wolves and drunks as donkeys! 
• Argument from Knowledge: Learning to Plato is simply remembering what the soul already knew from it's time in the Land of the Forms. His example was the Form of Equals, we can't physically see equals but we recognise what it means. 

There are, however, problems with these arguments:

• Peter Geach rejected the idea that the soul can know the forms as we need to bodies senses to "see" them, in other words our senses require a body to function and we experience things through these senses. 
• Learning isn't remembering as learning is an active process in which new knowledge is acquired. 
• The opposites assumption can be challenged.
• The Theory of the Forms is debatable. (Look back to AS here!)  

To Plato the soul was simple yet complex. Whilst this sounds complicated it isn't, as by simple he means that it cannot be broken down, it is one whole. However it can have different aspects within the whole. Plato defined these aspects as:

• Reason
• Spirit
• Desire 

Because these aspects conflict they must exist according to Plato. Anthony Kenny explained this using an analogy:
 A child is having a tantrum. The spirit and desire are not being controlled by reason so the spirit is not in harmony.

It was very important for Plato that the spirit remained in harmony as otherwise a person may not obtain knowledge of the Forms. This leads onto the idea that you should do good things because they are good, not for any other reasons such as money or fame, as then the soul is not in harmony and knowledge of the Forms cannot be gained.

Aristotle and Monism

Aristotle believed in monism. This is the idea that the soul and the body are inseparable so when one dies so does the other. The soul can't possibly survive death as it is unable to separate from the body so dies with it. BUT Aristotle then confuses everybody by adding that perhaps intellect could be separated and live on to be eternal. This seems very contradictory, and Anthony Kenny pointed out that Aristotle's views are "Inconstant".

He had a different definition for the soul;
"The principle of activity and life in the body. It also gives the body Form. It is inseparable." 
So basically the soul gives the body it's shape and it's life. Looking back over Aristotle at AS might help you to understand this bit. 

Aristotle argued that the soul has faculties:

• Nutrition
• Desire
• Perception
• Locomotion
• Intellect

Not all living things have all of them, there is a hierarchy, For example plants would have Nutrition but animals would have this and Locomotion. For humans it is our intellect which distinguishes us.We have a rational soul whilst animals have an irrational soul. 

Living creatures with higher faculties also have lower ones too. 

Plato and Aristotle

Note to self, needs double checking from the book! 

Welcome

Welcome to my blog about philosophy. It is mainly to help with my own revision but I hope if anybody looks at it it will help you too. The topics included are:

-Life after Death

-Miracles

-Religious Experience

-Revelation and Holy Scripture

-Religious Language

-Nature/Attributes of God 

I used these books:

Good luck in your exams :)