Schemes of salvation

Using the article we read in class, and doing a little more research on your own, give a brief description of the scheme of salvation in one of the major world religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc.). Your description should include:

1. A description of the human predicament according to that religion: what is the root cause of the fact that our lives are troublesome and often miserable?
2. A description of the solution: what can human beings do to escape from their predicament?
3. A description of the desired end state of the process of salvation (i.e. Nirvana, new heavens and new earth, being in heaven, etc.)

Why does God allow evil?

Think about the various 'defenses' of God put forward by the prisoners at Auschwitz:

1. If the Jewish people are suffering, they must have broken their contract with God.
2. The Holocaust is a purification of the Jewish people, effected through the suffering of good Jews.
3. God has given us free will.

Try to apply these explanations in a broader context, not specific to the Holocaust. Do you find plausible that suffering in the world is punishment for human sin, that it purifies us, or that it is the result of free will? What do you think of the responses to these defenses? Can the amount and degree of evil in this world ever be justified?

The moral argument

Does the moral argument provide evidence for the existence of God? Give at least three reasons why or why not.

Implications of a-moralism

Today in class we were reading an editorial by Joel Marks called "Confessions of an ex-moralist". Based on your careful reading of this article:

1. What was the author's view about the nature of morality before his 'anti-epiphany'?
2. What was the realization that led him to change his view?
3. What is the foundation of the author's new view? What is the fundamental insight at the heart of this new view?
4. Is the author's view of morality satisfactory? Does it successfully account for our everyday moral experience?

Fine-Tuning and the Design Argument

Recall our discussion in class today about the fine-tuning of physical constants. The main idea is that there are certain numbers, called physical constants, which cannot be predicted from physics and which determine the kind of universe we find ourselves in. A list of fundamental constants can be found here. Because they cannot be predicted from physical theory (in other words, they have to be inputed from the outside), and because the range of values of such constants which results in a life-permitting universe is very very small, the odds of a life-permitting universe such as ours arising by chance is very small.

Because of this, some philosophers have used fine-tuning as evidence for the existence of God in the following way: recall that we recognize an object as an artifact if its parts are accurately adjusted to each other and constitute means toward the fulfillment of a certain purpose (they are means to an end). Physical constants are 'parts' of the world-machine and seem to exhibit accurate adjustment to each other (it is not enough for one constant to be tuned within the life-permitting range, all the other constants have to be tuned to that range at the same time) and exhibit means-ends functionality (the constants have the values they do IN ORDER to produce life). Since artifacts are products of intelligent agency, and if the Universe is an artifact, then it too must be the product of intelligent agency.

A summary of the fine-tuning argument can be found here.

What do you think of this argument? Is fine-tuning evidence for the existence of God? Think of at least two potential objections to this argument (you should read chapter 12 in our textbook as well).

Why study philosophy?

Here is the link to the reading we did in class today. I highly encourage all of you to read some more of Bill Vallicella's writing, as it really is top-notch (although some of it is very technical). After re-reading the piece, answer the following prompt:

-According to Vallicella, what is the point of studying philosophy, and why does he argue that such study should not be justified in pragmatic terms? Do you agree with him?

Understanding the design argument

In our reading from David Hume's Dialogues today, the speaker listed two characteristics of the world-machine which suggest a resemblance to human artifacts:

-the accurate adjustment of the parts of the world-machine to each other
-the 'curious' adapting of means to ends among those parts

Think of at least three different examples of everyday human artifacts (objects intentionally designed and produced by human beings) and explain how they exhibit these two characteristics. For example, we can see in the mechanical wristwatch the accurate adjustment of parts to each other when we notice that all the little cogs, springs and wheels are positioned so that they all fit perfectly in the space within the casings, without any of the little parts protruding or inhibiting the movement of the other parts. And all the little components are intentionally positioned in such a way so that when the parts move, that movement is regular enough to measure intervals of time, which is the watch's purpose (adapting of means to ends).

Here are some further links to explore:

-Design Arguments for the Existence of God

-Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Part II (Here you can read the full dialogue from which the paragraph we read in class was extracted, as well as some of the initial criticisms the other speakers level at this argument)

Arguing the cosmological argument

Please respond to BOTH of these prompts:

1. Choose one of the premises of the kalam cosmological argument, list evidence for and against this premise, and say whether or not you find it reasonable.

2. Choose one of the premises of the contingency cosmological argument, list evidence for and against this premise, and say whether or not you find it reasonable.

The Big Bang

Sorry for the delay, folks. Here are some videos you can consult to better understand the Big Bang and the issues relating to the cosmological arguments.

Big Bang Introduction (from Khan Academy):

It might also help to watch the following videos, also from Khan Academy: Radius of Observable Universe (with correction), Red Shift, Cosmic Background Radiation (and its sequel).

Also worth watching about the connection between religion and cosmology is the first episode of the Nova series hosted by Morgan Freeman, Through the Wormhole (this is just the first part of three, you can find the rest in the 'Related' section) This video also gives a preview of the design argument, which we will discuss next:

Finally, here's William Lane Craig, whose article we've been consulting, on the kalam cosmological argument (also just the first part, see the 'Related' section for Part 2):

The Cosmological Argument

This week we are discussing the cosmological argument, which is really a family of related arguments. What they all have in common is their conclusion: that an immaterial, powerful being outside the Universe brought the Universe into existence. It is a very challenging argument to understand, so we'll need to consult multiple sources in order to understand it.

-First, read chapter 7 in our textbook, Thinking About God
-You may also want to consult the following links:

The New Atheism and Five Arguments for the Existence of God by William Lane Craig (you only have to read Section 1: The Cosmological Argument from Contingency and Section 2: The Kalam Cosmological Argument)

The Thomistic Cosmological Argument by David Beck

Help with comments posting

Guys,

It seems like most of the problems people are having with posting comments can be solved by logging into your Google account from the Google home page BEFORE you go to the blog itself. So to post a comment, go to Google.com, sign into your account, and then go to the blog URL.

First Reflection Paper

The final draft of this reflection paper will be due Wednesday, September 28 by 10 pm in the RenWeb Homework Drop. Please figure out how to use the Drop before then. As a last resort, you may send in your assignment via email attachment, but you should have enough time to figure RenWeb out, so the second reflection paper will be submitted ONLY using the Drop.

You should write two pages, 12 size font, double-spaced, on the following question:

We opened this unit comparing and contrasting Faith and Reason. Initially you suggested a very clear distinction between the two: faith was understood as believing something without proof, associated with wishful thinking, whereas reason was understood in connection with proof, open-mindedness and scientific thinking. Based on our viewing of the movie "Contact", how do you now understand the relationship between faith and reason? Discuss the way both Ellie and Palmer combine faith and reason in their common quest for truth.

Contact, Part 5

First of all, make sure you've left a comment on all previous posts (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 and Part 4).

If you missed watching the ending of the movie in class, here it is on YouTube, in two parts (some overlap):

Ellie, the self-professed skeptic and agnostic, gets a taste of her own medicine as she returns from her life-changing encounter with alien beings only to face skepticism and incredulity when she cannot produce any physical evidence of her trip.

Compare the extraordinary experiences of Palmer and Ellie. How are they similar, and how are they different? What do you think the movie is trying to say about how we should form beliefs about the world? Is the demand for physical evidence always a reasonable one?

Contact, Part 4

We've now almost reached the end of the movie, and we are seeing the themes which were introduced in the beginning, about the vastness and awesome beauty of space, our perceived isolation, our need to communicate, and our need to believe come full circle.

1. Think about Drumlin's statement to the effect that he actually wishes the world were a fair place and one where idealism was rewarded. Do you think he is sincere in this wish? What do you think of Ellie's response ("Funny, I always believed the world is what we make of it")?
2. Think about Ellie's words as she comments on her experience in the capsule:

She is so enraptured by the celestial phenomena around her that she suggests Earth should have sent a poet and that the scene can't be described, that words are inadequate. Does this sound like a religious experience to you?
3. What did you think of the alien's message? Does his description of humanity ring true? Did he really answer any important questions about the meaning of life, or do these aliens sound just as bewildered and uncertain as human beings?

Contact, Part 3

We've gotten to the point in the movie where word of the extraterrestrial signal has gotten out and people are responding to it in all sorts of strange ways. Here are two questions to consider:

1. Consider the diverse ways in which various people (or groups of people) react to news of the signal. What does that say about human nature and the way in which we come to terms with momentous changes? Think also about how many of the responses to the signal that we observe in the New Mexico desert involve communication devices: microphones, headphones, antennas. What's the significance of that?

2. In the meeting with officials Ellie will not even consider the possibility that the aliens' intentions are hostile. At this stage is she justified in her stance? Are there occasions where it is justified and even desirable to take a 'leap of faith' even in the absence of certainty?

Contact, Part 2

Think back to four pivotal moments that we observed in today's session: how Ellie responded to the minister's suggestion that we should just accept certain things as God's will without asking why, how Ellie responded to Palmer's claim that he had experienced God, how Ellie responded to the prospect of losing her funding and of being ridiculed by the scientific establishment, and how she responded to the prospect of a genuine alien signal and answer the following questions:

1. What do these responses say about Ellie's character? How would you describe her?
2. Think about how Ellie and Palmer approach religious questions. What are the similarities? Differences?

(P.S. If you've just created your Google account don't forget to post your comment for Contact, Part 1!)

Contact, Part 1

For our first blog discussion, we will focus on the movie's majestic opening scene:

After you watch it through again, ponder the following words by the famous philosopher and mathematician Blaise Pascal:

Man is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness from which he emerges and the infinite in which he is engulfed...The eternal silence of these infinite spaces fills me with dread.

Did you have a similar reaction while watching the opening scene? What, if anything, do you think the 'silence of the infinite spaces' has to do with religion? Describe the effect the scene had on you, and comment on what reaction you think the director was trying to evoke.

Maybe We're All Conspiracy Theorists

Please read the following column by Matt Ridley in the Wall Street Journal:

Maybe We're All Conspiracy Theorists

Do you think the author is right to make the suggestion in the title? What feature of the human brain, according to Michael Shermer, makes us particularly prone to conspiracy theory thinking? Do you think religious beliefs resemble conspiracy theories? Why?

Commenting guidelines

Part of your grade in this course (20%) will depend on the quality of your comments on this blog. Here are some guidelines to consider:

1. Your comment should directly address the question: don't respond with generalities or start rambling off topic.
2. Your comment should be detailed: a single sentence response will generally be inadequate. I will generally expect at least a short paragraph.
3. Your comment should be thoughtful: don't just jot down the first thing that comes to mind. I will be looking for evidence that you have thought carefully about the question or discussion prompt and that your comment represents your best attempt to come to grips with the issues.
4. It goes without saying, but do not plagiarize or get someone else to write your comments for you.

Instructions

Welcome to our class blog! Here you will find links to additional resources in philosophy of religion, links to relevant videos and other media, and discussion posts which you are expected to contribute to. In order to contribute you will need to create a Google account. Here's how to do that:

1. Go to www.google.com
2. Click on 'Sign In' in the top-right corner
3. If you don't currently have a Google account, create one by clicking on the link just below the sign-in text boxes
4. Use your current email address and fill in the required information
5. Come back to this post and follow the instructions for submitting a comment, confirming that you have created a Google account
6. If you have any questions, consult Google Help