What is your answer?
If we found a big translucent ball in the forest, we could ask "Why does this ball exist?" -- and expect that there is some answer to this question. In reflecting on this example, Taylor tells us that
{ 1 } - we could adequately explain the existence of the ball by showing that it was very old or even that it always existed.
{ 2 } - there may be no reason at all why the ball exists.
{ 3 } - why there isn't such a ball in your yard equally requires an explanation.
{ 4 } - we could equally well ask of a rock (or of the planet earth or of the world as a whole) "Why does this exist?" -- and expect that there is some answer.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 4.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
If we found a big translucent ball in the forest, we could ask "Why does this ball exist?" -- and expect that there is some answer to this question. In reflecting on this example, Taylor tells us that
{ 1 } - we could adequately explain the existence of the ball by showing that it was very old or even that it always existed.
{ 2 } - there may be no reason at all why the ball exists.
{ 3 } - why there isn't such a ball in your yard equally requires an explanation.
{ 4 } - we could equally well ask of a rock (or of the planet earth or of the world as a whole) "Why does this exist?" -- and expect that there is some answer.
Showing that the ball is old (or even that it always existed) wouldn't explain WHY it existed.
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
If we found a big translucent ball in the forest, we could ask "Why does this ball exist?" -- and expect that there is some answer to this question. In reflecting on this example, Taylor tells us that
{ 1 } - we could adequately explain the existence of the ball by showing that it was very old or even that it always existed.
{ 2 } - there may be no reason at all why the ball exists.
{ 3 } - why there isn't such a ball in your yard equally requires an explanation.
{ 4 } - we could equally well ask of a rock (or of the planet earth or of the world as a whole) "Why does this exist?" -- and expect that there is some answer.
He says that this would be an absurd thing to thinks.
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is wrong. Please try again.
If we found a big translucent ball in the forest, we could ask "Why does this ball exist?" -- and expect that there is some answer to this question. In reflecting on this example, Taylor tells us that
{ 1 } - we could adequately explain the existence of the ball by showing that it was very old or even that it always existed.
{ 2 } - there may be no reason at all why the ball exists.
{ 3 } - why there isn't such a ball in your yard equally requires an explanation.
{ 4 } - we could equally well ask of a rock (or of the planet earth or of the world as a whole) "Why does this exist?" -- and expect that there is some answer.
He thinks that, in general, the non-existence of something doesn't require an explanation. It's only the existence of something (not its non-existence) that requires an explanation.
<= back | menu | forward =>
4 is correct!
If we found a big translucent ball in the forest, we could ask "Why does this ball exist?" -- and expect that there is some answer to this question. In reflecting on this example, Taylor tells us that
{ 1 } - we could adequately explain the existence of the ball by showing that it was very old or even that it always existed.
{ 2 } - there may be no reason at all why the ball exists.
{ 3 } - why there isn't such a ball in your yard equally requires an explanation.
{ 4 } - we could equally well ask of a rock (or of the planet earth or of the world as a whole) "Why does this exist?" -- and expect that there is some answer.
This leads Taylor to the principle of sufficient reason: "For every positive contingent truth, there's some sort of explanation (known or unknown) of why it's true."
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
the end