Augustine

Knowledge

• According to Augustine, there are two kinds of knowledge:
1. Knowledge of contingent truths based on perception
2. Knowledge of necessary truths based on reason
• Contingent truths are those that could possibly be false (my hair is red; I live in Tucson; there are eight planets in our solar system; all of these things could have turned out differently). Necessary truths are those that could not possibly be false (2 + 2 = 4; all bachelors are unmarried; triangles have three sides; none of these things could have turned out differently).
• The two types of knowledge work together: using perception, I might see an object with three sides; then using reason, I could conclude that since anything with three sides is a triangle, I am looking at a triangle.

Illumination

• How does knowledge by reason work?
• Augustine's answer is that it works by God illuminating our minds—when we learn a necessary truth, that is God—somehow—bringing our minds directly into contact with that truth
• Augustine has three arguments that illumination is how we learn necessary truths; we'll go through them
• The argument from universality and necessity:
1. We know some universal and necessary truths.
2. To know a universal and necessary truth is to be in contact with the Forms (remember the Forms from Plato?).
3. We cannot come into contact with the forms by perception!
4. God himself just is all of the forms.
5. Coming into contact with the forms is coming into contact with God.
6. When we know a universal truth, that is being in direct contact with God.
7. Coming into contact with God in this way is being illuminated by God.
8. Therefore, we are illuminated by God.
• The argument from language:
1. We can tell the difference in meaning between some co-extensive words (co-extensive words are words that refer to all the same things even though they have different meanings—like “triangle” and “trilateral”)
2. Since all we learn by perception is what the words refer to, we cannot learn this difference in meaning by perception
3. Knowing the meaning is understanding the form—we already saw that understanding a form is to be illuminated.
4. So we must be illuminated by God to tell this difference in meaning.
• The argument from hierarchy:
• This argument is confusing and weird: just know this: Augustine, like Plato, thinks there is a hierarchy of being and that the things higher up in the hierarchy have more being (or reality) than the things lower down.
• Because of these arguments, Augustine concludes that our knowledge of necessary truths is the result of illumination by God.
• Two important things to note:
1. Not everyone is illuminated equally: we all know it takes a lot of work to get good in mathematics.
2. Knowledge by illumination is NOT innate knowledge
• Maloney's two objections to illumination:
1. Augustine never told us what the process is by which illumination takes place
2. Some evil people know necessary truths, but surely a good God wouldn't illuminate evil people (if illumination is right, God sometimes illuminates evil people)

Creation Ex Nihilo

Change requires something coming from nothing. Only God can do that, so God must be responsible for each change that happens in the universe. Here we have a picture of a very active God--he is constantly creating the universe from nothing.

Two things result from this: 1.God is (in some sense) responsible for everything that happens. 1. God knows everything that's going to happen.

The Problem of Evil

Here is an argument that God does not exist. Since Augustine thinks God does exist, he'll have to find something wrong with the argument; we'll talk about what he thinks is wrong with it in a minute.

1. Assume that God exists, where by "God" we mean a being that is all-knowing (omnisicient), all-powerful (omnipotent), and all-good (benevolent)
2. If God is all-good, then he will want to prevent any evil.
3. So God wants to prevent any evil.
4. If God is all-powerful, then he will be able to prevent any evil.
5. So God is able to prevent any evil.
6. If God is all-knowing, then he will know of any evil.
7. So God knows of any evil.
8. If anyone knows of something evil, wants to prevent, and is able to prevent it, then that person does prevent it.
9. So God prevents all evil--there is no evil.
10. But, of course, there is evil--lots of it.
11. A contradiction. So God does not exist.

This argument is a reductio ad absurdum. This sort of argument starts out by assuming what it wants to prove is false, shows that a contradiction follows, and so concludes that the assumption is false. Here is another example.

1. Assume that there is a largest number and call it "n".
2. For any number, adding 1 to it results in a larger number.
3. So n+1 is larger then n.
4. So n is not the larger number.
5. Contradiction. Hence, there is no largest number.

Remember that Augustine thinks God exists, so he needs to find something wrong with the argument we presented that God does not exist. He has an answer: he denies step 10. That is, he denies that there is any evil in the world.

Augustine has a view according to which evil isn't anything that exists, but the absence (to some degree) of good. Much the way you might think that darkness isn't some special thing, but just the absence (to some degree) of light. So, since there's not any evil, we don't actually get a contradiction, and so we can still believe that God exists.

What about immorality? Isn't that when people choose to do evil? No, says Augustine, that's just people choosing what is less good.

Freedom, Necessity, and Volition

Augustine thinks we're free. But here's an argument that shows that if God exists, we're not free. Augustine will have to find something wrong with this argument.

1. If God is all-knowing, then he knows everything everyone will ever do.
2. God is all-knowing.
3. So God knows everything everyone will ever do.
4. If God knows something is going to happen, then it must happen.
5. So everything that will happen, must happen.
6. So everything you do you must do.
7. If you must do something, then you're not free in doing it.
8. So you're not free in anything you do.

Augustine's response is to deny step 7. Freedom does not require that you could have done something different. It just requires that you actually do what you want. Example: suppose someone is locked in a room, but doesn't want to leave. Then doesn't he freely choose to stay in the room? So, anytime we do something we want, according to Augustine, we act freely. And we do what we want quite often, so we have a lot of freedom, according to Augustine.