Explain the argument and/or interpretation in the passage – 30marks

INTRODUCTION- This should be short and concise and summarise the passage as well as introduce the philosopher/text and main thesis of your argument.PARAGRAPHS : Identify one part of the argument from the passage and explore the philosopher's meaning. Choose 1 to 2 quotations to flesh out and support your explanation as well as one other philosopher who supports this argument. EXAMPLE: One of the key ideas of the passage is that if God was identified with the natural world then statements including them might be meaningful. However, as Ayer goes on to illustrate, sophisticated, non-animistic religions, which is highlighted through his use of ‘Jehovah’, suggesting a monotheistic religion, such as Christianity, see God as controlling nature instead of being a part of it. Ayer writes, “The person who is supposed to control the empirical world is not himself located in it, he is held to be superior to the empirical world…” In just the same way as he dismisses second- order things, as shown by his description of natural objects, meaning first-order objects, he rejected meaningfulness of claims that first order things demonstrate God’s existence. Ayer points out that the theist would claim that the originator of ‘acts’ would be someone outside of the universe. Hume develops this thinking and states that even if you could say that there was a being who created the world, it cannot be proved that this is the transcendent God of Christianity. Here, I have concisely outlined this part of the argument (stated the thesis) and developed it through referencing other parts of the passage and finding supporting evidence for the argument from another philosopher. Then- CRITICAL ANALYSIS. This is the most crucial part of the essay as in order to get the marks, you need to critically evaluate the argument put forward in the passage and use other sources to back up your claims or arguments against the interpretation. EXAMPLE:However, Swinburne claims that religious experiences such as miracles lead to the likely conclusion that there is an external agency who is the cause of these. Swinburne suggests that a residue of apparently well-authenticated highly unusual events, apparently contrary to laws of nature, but such as a God would have reason for bringing about (for example, a spontaneous cure of cancer in answer to much prayer) is veridical evidence. The supreme miracle—the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is used by Swinburne to support his claim. Ayer’s verification principle would claim that the resurrection of Christ would not satisfy as a claim due to it not only being a non-empirical fact but also a historical statement, which makes it validity non-existent and is therefore meaningless. I have referenced another scholar and used their own arguments to construct a logical set of premises to highlight the flaws in the initial argument. Using words such as 'However', 'on the other hand' etc, show the examiner when you are entering your critique section and allows them to identify it more easily. I used an example to show the inconsistencies when up against the original argument (which in this case is Ayer's verification principle). Use quotes sparingly and always explain them- they are there for a reason!CONCLUSION:Summarise once again, the main thesis of the argument and mention any specifics that are relevant to your arguments you have selected. This should be concise and short and remind the examiner of the main interpretation of the passage.EXAMPLE:In conclusion, Ayer is once more highlighting that any statement that expresses unverifiable opinions or claims are to be disregarded and classed as meaningless and that we have to reject the idea of a transcendent God due to the inability of being able to prove a meta-physical being who controls the physical world and so therefore, we must reject the idea of God because the very definition of a non-animistic God is who is transcendent and metaphysical and transcendence is neither analytically true or synthetically verifiable.