Textbooks: Classic Questions and Contemporary Film, by Dean A. Kowalski, (McGraw-Hill, 2005) 0-07-285021-3
Religion Exams - On this page, after the Assignment Table.
TO BE DONE BY:
Assignment
Other
Sent by email: To be read by first class period : Sept 12.
READING ASSIGNMENT:
.READ pp. 1-11. I want you to have a reasonably good idea of what deductive arguments are; since this is not a logic course, skim or even skip pp. 11-19.
B. READ pp. 19-24 on Inductive Arguments. Skip the exercises.
C. READ pp. 24-40. The point here is that philosophers aim at the truth, or at least at positions which can be backed by the strongest evidence and reasons. Scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
READ The Apology, pp. 41-47. Socrates is one of the most famous people in the western intellectual tradition. Like Jesus, he was put on trail and condemned to death.
READ The Value of Philosophy, Bertrand Russell, pp. 50-51.
Read Syllabus carefully.
Sept 19th, 26th and Oct 3rd
Determinism and Hard Determinsm
Sept, 19th. Chapter 2, Epistemology and Scepticism
Read: pp. 53-73
Skip or Skim: Plato, Chuang Tzu, Sextus Empiricus. pp. 73-83.
Read Carefully: Descartes’ Meditations, pp. 83-92
Read: Hospers, 95-99
Read Skim: Code: 104-108
Read email outlines.
October 10th
Chapter 3, God, Creation and Evil
Parts of video: A History of God
GOD and RELIGION - Oct 10, 17, 24 with Exam Oct 31
Reading for October 10th. Pp. 111- 136, up to Design Argument. Also, read Anselm and Guanilo to get the flavor of a Medieval debate, pp 151-153. And read Thomas Aquinas, pp., 153-154; I will concentrate on the "Third Way. Although I am not going to use Bruce Almighty, the write up is useful. Three Main Themes: Issues in Concepts of God; Ontological Argument; Cosmological Argument. There is more detail in the reading than necessary, so I will bring out main points.
Group Discussions: Concept of God and History of God - A Video
October 17. Teleological Argument and Problem of Evil
October 17: Argument for Design and the Problem of Evil: Section 3.5 & 3.6, pp. 136-150. Read William Paley, page 155 only; Darwin 161-167; John Hick's article is a bit wordy, but it is a clear statement of the standard Christian view. The key answer he gives to "Why moral evil?" is from 170, 2, to 171, 2, b. His answer to "Why Natural Evil?" is 174, 1, b to 175, 2, a. (I will have handouts on this which should clarify the argument.)
The Problem of Evil - Structure of Problem and possible solutions.
An Excellent Account and Criticism of Design
Be sure to read this carefully.
October 24th Film
The Devil's Advocate or Dogma
October 31
Exam on God, Creation and Evil
November 7 Fatalism and Hard Determinism: No one is free.
FREEDOM, DETERMINISM and FOREKNOWLEDGE Chapter 5 in Kowalski. Read pp. 273-293 and Holbach, 307-312.
Clips from: Matrix Reloaded and Minority Report
November 14. Compatibilism and Free Will
Film Clip: Clockwork Orange. A lengthy summary and analysis.
Compatibilism: Freedom and Determism or both true.
Free-Will, Agent Causality, Libertarianism: Determinism does not apply to human beings: Campbell: Handout. Agent Causation 293-298.
You might find this outline of Campbell helpful: Campbell.
Handout on Campbell with Compatibilism on the back. (Pink)
Critical Review of Campbell's position from a Christian standpoint
November 21. More on Compatibilism and debates among the three positions.
Suggestion: Read the full Stace article.
Examples of freedom (W.T. Stace)
Stanford Encyc. Article on Compatibilism
Handout of Mayo's review of compatibilism. Important for Exam
Hospers' Psychoanalytic Hard Determism depends on FREUD
November 28
Presentation and details on Campbell's Free-Will position.
More discussion on freedom
Re-read: Full Summary by Evans
Dec 5
Exam on Freedom and Determinism
Dec 12
Film. Run, Lola Run.
Take Home Final handed out.
Work on Final
Work on Final
Work on Final
December 19th, Monday.
Take Home Final Exam Due by 8:00 A.M. in ABAH 305.
Comprehensive exam: Knowledge, God and Freedom
Philosophy of Religion
Sample Exams: ALL of the following were with different texts, but
A Study Sheet (for a different year):
1) Discuss different concepts of divinity and how they fulfill or don't fulfill both psychological needs and what one might call intellectual requirements. Worry a bit about, "I hope or need a God, therefore I believe in God." What is the problem with saying, "God is unknowable or ineffable?" Give one argument against the view that there is personal survival of death.
2) Discuss the argument from Design, its logical structure and how it has special relevance to the problem of evil. See the handout on the Teleological Argument, lecture and Blackburn 163-168. Be able to show how it is an analogical argument, and show how it is a weak analogical argument. Perhaps you can even say something about what it MEANS to say that something is designed and what inferences can or can't be made.
3) Problem of Evil. Exactly what is the problem? That is, what questions does any answer have to meet? When people use the "God gave us free will" answer, exactly what concept of "free will" is being used? Is it coherent? Be able to list possible answers; be able to spell out at least some of these answers. And be able to reply to the answers. What is the "vale of tears" answer (see Blackburn) And, the reply. What is the point of Blackburn's "dorms and management" story (p. 170.) What is a William Tell test and what is its relevance to the problem of evil?
My intention on the last day is to say something about Faith and Pascal's Wager Argument (185-189), so you should have some idea about issues surrounding the connections, or lack thereof, between faith and knowledge (reason - evidence.) Is faith a form of knowledge? Can you get truths by faith that you cannot get by knowledge? Is there a difference between trust and blind faith? We discussed Clifford's Ethics of Belief? Do you think it is morally irresponsible to believe something solely on the basis of faith.
Should have general idea of the Ontological Argument & the Cosmological Argument (general characteristics, who proposed them) from Blackburn.
Handouts or on Web
Terminology (web)
The Ontological Argument, The Cosmological Argument and The Teleological Argument or Argument from Design (handouts - emails)
Email on possible answers to the Problem of Evil (handout was part of this)
Mayo's analysis of the "testing ground" argument (Web)
PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY: FINAL, DECEMBER 19, 2000
I. Do SIX of the following: 5 points each
Theodicy
Thomas Aquinas
Anthropomorphism
Agnositc
3. What is key feature of an analogical argument or what is the usual method of attacking such an argument.
4. What is strong atheism, and what is one reason given in its support?
5. How does Mayo's reply to the claim that God only permits evil; he does not cause it?
6. "To take cause is to take away the effect." What is the point? What is the reply?
7.What is wrong with this answer to evil: "It all turns out good in the long run."
8. Why is the theory of evolution a threat to the argument from design?
Essays: Do both essays, that is, number 1 and either 2A or 2B.
1. Thoroughly examine either the cosmological or the teleological argument. Set out the best version you can and then analyze it, that is, give the arguments of the skeptic. What do you think of the argument? Convincing? Silly? Irrelevant?
2. A Exactly what is the problem of evil and why is it a challenge to the usual Judaic-Christian view? Consider the following attempts to answer the problem, and show the problems with these answers:
a) evil is a result of free will
b) earthly life is a testing ground
c) we need evil in order to be able to experience good
Part I: Do one of the following.
1. Exactly what is the problem of evil and why is it a challenge to the usual Judaic-Christian view? Consider the following attempts to answer the problem, and show the problems with these answers:
a) evil is a result of free will
b) earthly life is a testing ground
c) we need evil in order to be able to experience good
2. After Paley gives his argument he considers some possible objections. Here are three objections he considers:
a) "...that we had never seen a watch...(or) that we had never known an artist capable of making one" would not weaken the argument.
b) "Neither would it invalidate the conclusion that the watch sometimes went wrong."
c) A paraphrase: Nor would it weaken my argument to be told that there were principles of order built into the nature of matter. Playing the role of philosopher extraordinaire (perhaps modeled partly after Philo) point out the weaknesses in Paley's defense.
I. Circle the BEST answer to the following:
The author of the cosmological argument is:
a) Aquinas d) Hume
b) Jesus e) Paley
c) Doubting Thomas
Which of the following is NOT an assumption of the traditional problem of evil?
a) God is perfectly good
b) God is omnipotent
c) There is real evil
d) God created it all
A transcendent god is:
a) other and apart from the world d) equivalent with the universe
b) unknowable e) an analogical god
c) "inside" the human spirit
Theodicy is:
a) theory of God and gods
b) a dialogue about religion
c) the name of an argument for God's existence
d) the name of a character in Hume's dialogue
e) the justification of evil
The analogical argument we studied is often called:
a) the teleological argument d) the pantheistic argument
b) Pascal's wager argument e) the anthropological argument
c) cosmological argument f) the Catholic argument
Paley considers a number of objections to his theory based on the watch. Which of the following does he NOT consider:
a) that the watch sometimes doesn't work
b) that we had never seen a watch
c) that there are natural laws which explain the watch
d) that the universe bears little resemblance to a watch
Which of the following reasons does Aquinas give for the premise: it is impossible to go on to infinity:
a) because to take away the cause is to take away the effect
b) because then there would be no first cause
c) because something cannot come from nothing
d) because God is the first cause
Cleanthes's arguments, in Hume's Dialogue can best be described as an"
a)atheistic
b)pantheistic
c)animistic
d)naturalistic
e)pessimistic
PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY
Final Examination
Short Answer. Do 5 OF THE FOLLOWING: Be brief but clear. 3 pts each
1. State three criticisms of the cosmological argument.
2. State three criticisms Darrow makes of the teleological argument.
3. What is anthropomorphism in religion?
5. According to Mayo, what is the problem with the assertion that God only permits evil?
6. What are some of the possible meanings of design?
7. In one sentence, what is the basis of John Hospers hard determinism?
II. Essays ONE essay from each section: A, B, and C. (A total of three - 15 points each.)
A.1. James insists that there is chance in the universe; Fowles thinks that hazard plays an important part of human affairs. What do these terms mean and how, according to James and Fowles do they enhance or guarantee freedom?
2. The soft determinist or compatibilist believes that determinism is compatible with moral responsibility. What is the position and what is the argument for compatibility?
3. What is the problem of evil? What are some of the possible answers to the problem (remember Hick). Using the Mayo essay as a guide, what are the criticisms to Hicks attempted solution of the problem?
1. State three criticisms of Hick's major explanation of natural evil.
2. Some say that human free will is the reason for evil in the world. What are two objections to this view?
3. What is panentheism?
6. According to James, what does "chance" mean?
7. What is the major difference between self and character according to Campbell?
A.1. Compatibilists claims that you can change your character if you want to. How does this argument fit into the free will-determinism issue? Would Hospers agree? Which of the positions seems to best describe Hospers overall position?
2. The hard determinist claims that moral responsibility is incompatible with determinism; Stace and other soft determinists claim that determinism is a necessary condition for holding someone morally responsible. Give their arguments in as much detail as possible.
3. The arguments for God's existence are attempted explanations. Exactly what are they trying to explain? Do they succeed or fail as explanations?
II. Essay
1. We have discussed some of the problems with respect to the conception of God and the meaning of religious language. Discuss different conceptions of God and the function that such conceptions have for people. Show how some of these conceptions compete with a scientific view of the world and discuss how other conceptions raise questions about the meaning of religious utterances.
2. Explain and criticize some of the possible explanations of evil given by Johnson and Hick?
The Teleological Argument (Argument from Design)
Problem of Evil: Outline of the Problem
Problem of Evil: Critique of John Hick' s Proposed Solutions by David Mayo
Email revans@mail.d.umn.edu
Handout: Holbach: The Denial of Human Freedom
Free Will and Determinism, READ ALLHandout: Analyzing Concepts and the Meaning of Terms,
Compatibilist or Soft Determinist Definition of Freedom
Read the summary of Freedom and Determinism
Return to Robert Evans' Home Page
This page is maintained by revans mailto:revans@mail.d.umn.edu
Last modified on Sunday, Oct 8, 2005