What is your answer?
Mackie objected to the principle of sufficient reason (which we formulated as "For every positive contingent truth, something explains why it's true") that
{ 1 } - it may be just a demand of our minds -- not a truth about things.
{ 2 } - there's no proof that it's true.
{ 3 } - it's too strong, since it requires complete explainability.
{ 4 } - He gave all of these objections.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 4.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
Mackie objected to the principle of sufficient reason (which we formulated as "For every positive contingent truth, something explains why it's true") that
{ 1 } - it may be just a demand of our minds -- not a truth about things.
{ 2 } - there's no proof that it's true.
{ 3 } - it's too strong, since it requires complete explainability.
{ 4 } - He gave all of these objections.
He also gave the other objections.
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
Mackie objected to the principle of sufficient reason (which we formulated as "For every positive contingent truth, something explains why it's true") that
{ 1 } - it may be just a demand of our minds -- not a truth about things.
{ 2 } - there's no proof that it's true.
{ 3 } - it's too strong, since it requires complete explainability.
{ 4 } - He gave all of these objections.
He also gave the other objections.
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is wrong. Please try again.
Mackie objected to the principle of sufficient reason (which we formulated as "For every positive contingent truth, something explains why it's true") that
{ 1 } - it may be just a demand of our minds -- not a truth about things.
{ 2 } - there's no proof that it's true.
{ 3 } - it's too strong, since it requires complete explainability.
{ 4 } - He gave all of these objections.
He also gave the other objections.
<= back | menu | forward =>
4 is correct!
Mackie objected to the principle of sufficient reason (which we formulated as "For every positive contingent truth, something explains why it's true") that
{ 1 } - it may be just a demand of our minds -- not a truth about things.
{ 2 } - there's no proof that it's true.
{ 3 } - it's too strong, since it requires complete explainability.
{ 4 } - He gave all of these objections.
So he thought that this principle is doubtful.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
the end