Final Exams

Our final exam time is Monday, May 5 at 1-3. Please be here at one to give us a preview, or the complete version, of your final paper: what arguments are you discussing, what's your verdict on the arguments, who makes the better case, etc?

Final exam writing project is due by Wednesday at noon by Turnitin. MAKE IT VERY CLEAR ON YOUR ASSIGNMENT IF YOU ARE, OR HOPE TO BE, A GRADUATING SENIOR.

Course evaluations are to be done here:

http://www.morehouse.edu/course-evaluations 

Wednesday we shall discuss Craig's response to SA in chapter 5.

Recall that you'll need to read and evaluate chapter 3 and 6, the response to the responses, independently.

Final paper assignment, again

Final paper:

Due at time of final exam, which is Monday, May 5 at 1-3 PM. Please come prepared to briefly present your paper to the class.

Due by Turnitin also. (No Turnitin = no grade).

Present and explain at least two of the main arguments from Craig and Sinnott-Armstrong and their responses to each other's arguments. THESE MAIN ARGUMENTS SHOULD ALL BE DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS: SO, TWO ARGUMENTS FROM ONE THINKER AND TWO DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS FROM THE OTHER THINKER. NO ARGUMENT SHOULD BE THE SAME. (So, e.g., present and explain at least two of Craig's main arguments and Sinnott-Armstrong's response to those exact arguments, and vice versa). Explain who makes a better case for his overal conclusion(s) and why.

Your paper should have a clear and straightforward introduction.
It should have clearly marked sections.
It should have a proper conclusion, that summarizes what you did in the paper.
It should be written, as Pryor says, for an audience who knows nothing about these topics.

Your paper should conform to all the guidance on writing, and writing philosophy, you've been given in this course.

Reading for Monday with our guest speaker on Islam:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/l40cx853z0zupp4/Esposito%20-%20what%20you%20should%20know%20about%20Islam.PDF

Questions from Dr. King to prepare answers for:
1) What do Muslims believe?
2) What does Islam say about poverty and social justice?
3) Are there any divisions in Islam
Question from Dr. Nobis:
4) Should *you* be a Muslim? Why or why not?

Final exam schedule:
http://tigernet.morehouse.edu/oit/pdf/Spring2014Exam.pdf 

For Friday, we will continue with the Craig-Sinnott-Armstrong book.

Change of plans for this Wednesday:
Roundtable Discussion:23 April 2014 @ 11:00, Merrill Seminar Room.

“What is the relationship between science and religion?” 

Panel Participants: 

Lycurgus L. Muldrow, PhD., Director of Sponsored Research and Integrative Activities, Division of Science and Mathematics, Morehouse College. 
Nathan Nobis, PhD., Department of Philosophy and Religion, Morehouse College. 
Harold Bennett, PhD., Chair, Department of Philosophy and Religion, Morehouse College. 
Duane Jackson, PhD., Department of Psychology, Morehouse College. 
And Dr. Troy Story, presiding. Our panelists will make reference to the following links, provided by Dr. Muldrow. 

Episode 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yro5QGf91kU 
Episode 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HELdTTP3A0Y 
Episode 3: http://youtu.be/mllHb6Dd5dU 
Episode 4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2EdJ4Tt-_g 
Episode 5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7jlf7UY-ns 
Episode 6: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Upv-QUgbdqs

Friday we will return to the God? book, chapter 4: we will skip chapter 3 (Craig's response to Sinnott-Armstrong) and skip chapter 6 (Sinnott-Armstrong's response to Craig's) and leave that for you to read and evaluate on your own. 

Wednesday: Ch. 1 of the God debate book.
Today we started this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8A3Sdw2Eig 

Today’s Distinguished Lectures at Harvard.

By

________

1.  The divine command theory of ethics is the view that ___________________________ EXPLAIN WHAT THIS VIEW IS.

2.  An argument or reason in favor of this view is ___________ OR an argument or reason against this view is ________________.

a.  True? False? Useful, or useless?

3.  I think that this argument or reason is sound or unsound because ________________. 

Two new assignments

As mentioned in class, please carefully read the Stairs chapter on God and morality.

Read and write a detailed summary of the remaining sections of the Harvard book on writing. Due Friday 4/11 via Turnitin.

Write a well organized essay that (1) presents and explains an argument for the existence of God from the existence of morality, that is, that some actions are morally wrong and others are not-wrong, and (2) explains whether that argument is sound or not and why, and (3) has a proper, brief introduction and (4) has sections heading, to mark off the section so the paper, and (5) has a brief, proper conclusion. Due Monday 4/14 via Turnitin. NOTE CHANGE.

Group Project

A group project assignment, due FRIDAY, April 25. NOTE CHANGE.

First, carefully read the Stairs chapter on arguments for the non-existence of God from the existence of certain kinds of evil. 

Your assignment is to create an educational tool that will help people evaluating responses to the argument or problem of evil, i.e., an educational tool to help people evaluate theodicies. 

Create your own group of 3 or 4 students. If you cannot find a group, you will be assigned to one.

Create a webpage or blog (on Blogger, Wordpress, Google Sites, wherever) where you do the following:

1. Explain the problem of evil or an argument for the non-existence of God from the existence of certain kinds of evils (do not consider an argument from the existence of evil in general: you need to focus on especially bad evils). That is, fully explain how someone might reason from the existence of certain kinds of evils - give examples -  to the conclusion that God probably does not exist. You want to present the strongest version of this argument that you can, not a "straw man" version of the argument. 

2. Identify least five critical responses to this argument, that is five theodicies. Please pick theodicies that you think are most important, most common and/or the strongest. 

3. Critically evaluate these theodicies, in light of the following concerns:
- what outweighing good does the theodicy propose? (You will likely need to distinguish intrinsic goods and evils/bads versusinstrumental goods and evils/bads: e.g. something can be intrinsically bad but instrumentally good)
- how good is that good, compared to the bad of the evil(s) in question? Is the good great enough to "outweigh" the evil in question?
- could that good have been achieved in some other way, without that evil, or as much of the evil, in question? That is, is that evilnecessary for that good, or could that good have been achieved without that evil (especially by an an all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good being?)?
- so does this theodicy succeed in showing what would morally justify an all-knowing, all-powerful, all good being in allowing that evil to occur? Does this theodicy succeed or fail?

4. Your page should have an introduction and a conclusion. Your conclusion should state and explain what you think someone should think about the argument from evil (and its implications for God's existence), in light of your evaluation of the theodicies that you discuss.  

It should be developed in a way that someone interested in these important issues would be able to learn how to better attempt to rationally evaluate theodicies and think more philosophically -- i.e., critically, creatively and with an open mind -- about philosophy of religion. 

5. Your page should be creative and look good!! :) The writing should be clear and straightforward and people should be able to learn from it.

Please email your link to Dr. Nobis, print it out and bring to class and post your link as a comment on this blog.

Relevant readings:
- Stairs chapter on the argument from evil
- Vuletic, A Tale of 12 Officers http://www.vuletic.com/hume/at/12.html 
Daniel Howard Snyder, "Theodicy," in ed. Kelly James Clark, Readings in the Philosophy of Religion (Broadview 2008, 2nd edition) 

Believing on the basis of:

-     “Epistemic / epistemological reasons”:

o  reasons and evidence that support thinking that some belief is true:

§  sensory experience: a posteriori evidence; empirical

§  thinking; reasoning; reflection: a priori evidence

§  memory;

§  scientific evidence: statistical information.

§  Recognizing a tradition.

-     On the basis of more or less nothing! 

o  “No clue.”

o  “Just because!” “Just cuz!”

o  #NewMATH

-     “Pragmatic or prudential reasons”: Whether a belief is useful or not, pragmatic or not.

Pascal’s Wager:

J	God exists	God does not exist
Believe in God	Infinite reward! J	Wasted some time ( some negatives ); Perhaps your life will be better in some ways though.. Mixed bag, but not infinite either way
Not believe in God	Eternal punishment! L	Another mixed bag..

o   

-     On the basis of faith.  

-     Believing because of various causes:

o  Brain injury or disease.

o  Wish fulfillment or wishful thinking… hope… [pragmatic?]

o  “brainwashing”..

o  Drugs / drunk / hypnotized

o  Love?

o  Hormones..

Reminder: as mentioned in class Friday, we will move on to the chapter on faith and pragmatic reasons for belief in God.

Please read that chapter in Stairs. 

Thanks!

Assignment: please make a list of the various tensions and possible inconsistencies among the various divine attributes discussed in Ch. 1. 

God =

S is God if, and only if:

1.        S is necessarily omnipotent = all powerful =

2.        S is necessarily  omniscient = “in all possible worlds’

3.        S is necessarily  omnibenevolent =

4.        S is omnipresent [?] = ?

5.        S exists necessarily.

6.        S eternal and/or everlasting = either ‘outside of time’ but always existing OR in time but has always existed… (HMM?)

7.        Unchanging = his character or essential or core attributes does not or would not change, 

8.        S has “free will”

9.        S is supernatural / outside of the natural laws 

10.   S is immaterial, not a physical being, a spiritual being

11.   S is a person. = beings with personalities; conscious, feelings, rationality, emotions, etc.

a.S is a person if and only if…

                                        i.    “essential properties”… “accidental properties”…..

If God exists, then God is not a person because…

1.        Miracles happen. ?

2.        If miracles happen, then God exists.

3.        Therefore God exists.

4.        People have ‘religious experiences.’\

a.Feelings of ecstasy, it seeming like God is speaking to you, etc. 

b.VERIDICAL OR NOT?

c. TRUTHFUL OR NOT?

5.        If people have religious experiences, then God exists.

Assignment that'll soon be posted:
Small group project where you (1) present and explain the evidential argument from evil and (2) present and evaluate at least 5 theodicies.

Notes from the other day:
 
The evidential argument from evil for the conclusion that there does not exist a God.

1. Gratuitous, unjustified evils exist.
2. If God exists, then there probably wouldn’t be gratuitous evils.
3. Therefore, God probably doesn’t exist.

“Unjustified”= either
1. No good comes from the evil.
2. Some good comes from the evil but that good is not greater than the evil.
3. Some good comes from the  evil but that good could have been achieved without much evil.

Reminders:
You were asked to read this:
 "African-American Philosophy of Religion and the Many Problems of Evil" 

And in these issues of the Newsletter on Philosophy and the Black Experience there is discussion of William Jones' famous Is God a White Racist? book:

Black Experience Vol. 13, No. 1 (Fall 2013) PDF (444.44 KB)
Black Experience Vol. 12, No. 2 (Spring 2013) PDF (873.41 KB)

 See Google scholar also for discussion of Jones' book:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22is+god+a+white+racist%3F%22&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C11

Reminder, due Monday, via Turnitin:

Harvard writing book, pp. 57-99, detailed outline or summary. Due the Monday after break, March 24, in hardcopy and via Turnitin. NOTE THE CHANGE! :) 

Monday we will finish discussing the Dialogue book. Please read the final chapters: we can discuss anything from the final chapters.

Wednesday we will move on to the Thinkers' Guide to Philosophy of Religion, Ch. 1, the concept of God. 

Assignments for after the Break

Due Friday after the break, March 21: please read the interviews with Plantinga and Antony from the NY Times. Write a well organized essay, with explicitly stated sections, where you:

I. have an introduction that clearly and briefly explan what you will do in the paper;
II. Explain the main claims and arguments from Plantinga
III. Explain the main claims and arguments from Antony
IV. evaluate at least 4 of Plantinga's and Antony's claims or arguments (at least 2 each) in terms of whether you think they are true or sound or not.
V. write a brief concluion that explains what you did in this paper.

so:
I. Introduction
II. Plantinga's Claims and Arguments
III. Antony's Claims and Arguments
IV. Evaluating Plantinga's and Antony's Claims and Arguments.
V. Conclusion

Harvard writing book, pp. 57-99, detailed outline or summary. Due the Monday after break, March 24, in hardcopy and via Turnitin. NOTE THE CHANGE! :)

Midterm writing essay, due Friday 3/7. BY TURNITIN AND IN HARDCOPY. 

Short assignment: pick a different argument that what you discussed earlier and write a paper clearly stating and explaining the argument, some of the main objections to it, and whether the argument sound or not. Thus, a different version of this assignment, done in an even better way than before:

Your assignment is to clearly and accurately explain one of the arguments for God's existence discussed in these chapters, in a manner so that someone who was not familiar with these arguments would understand. You must also explain at least two objections and whether you think the argument is sound or not. 

Your writing must have these section in the paper; these sections must explicitly be in the paper


A Title (Give your paper an informative title)

I. Introduction
Use these exact words: In this paper, I will discuss the argument for God's existence known as _(give the name of the argument). I will first state the argument and explain each premise. I will then explain at least two objections to the argument. In my conclusion I will explain whether whether I think the argument is sound or not, which will involve explaining whether these objections are strong or not.   

II. The Argument

(fill in this section)

III. Objections to the Argument

(fill in this section)

IV. Conclusion

For Monday:
Please read and write a detailed, detailed, summary or outline by next Monday (3/3): Jim Pryor on how to write a philosophy paper; due via Turnitin:

http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/writing.html

Reading for Friday, 2/28,

The God decision

Christian parents teach their children to believe in God, atheists teach them not to. Who is doing the right thing?

by Michael Ruse

For Monday, read chapter 5 in the dialogue book on suffering. We will discuss this chapter and related issues and readings midterm week, including these readings: "A Tale of Twelve Officers" and "African-American Philosophy of Religion and the Many Problems of Evil"

Midterm writing essay, due Friday 3/7.

Short assignment: pick a different argument that what you discussed earlier and write a paper clearly stating and explaining the argument, some of the main objections to it, and whether the argument sound or not. Thus, a different version of this assignment, done in an even better way than before:

Your assignment is to clearly and accurately explain one of the arguments for God's existence discussed in these chapters, in a manner so that someone who was not familiar with these arguments would understand. You must also explain at least two objections and whether you think the argument is sound or not. 

Your writing must have these section in the paper; these sections must explicitly be in the paper


A Title (Give your paper an informative title)

I. Introduction
Use these exact words: In this paper, I will discuss the argument for God's existence known as _(give the name of the argument). I will first state the argument and explain each premise. I will then explain at least two objections to the argument. In my conclusion I will explain whether whether I think the argument is sound or not, which will involve explaining whether these objections are strong or not.   

II. The Argument

(fill in this section)

III. Objections to the Argument

(fill in this section)

IV. Conclusion

Please read and write a detailed, detailed, summary or outline by next Monday (3/3): Jim Pryor on how to write a philosophy paper; due via Turnitin:

http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/writing.html

More assignments posted soon.

Questions from today:

1.  What is the point (or points) of this class? What are we trying to do?

2.  Should other people accept or adopt your religious beliefs? Why or why not?

3.  Should you believe your own religious beliefs? Why or why not? COULD there be someone who should not accept or believe his or her religious beliefs? Who, when, how, why?

4.  If you went to a doctor with some symptoms, would you want the doctor to diagnose you on the basis of good reasons and evidence? If ‘yes,’ do you think religious beliefs should be held on the basis of good reasons, evidence and so forth?

a.  Big question behind this question: what are good reasons anyway, what is good evidence anyway??

5.  Can religious beliefs be good or bad? Are religious beliefs good or bad? Or good and bad? In what way(s)? How so? For who? When? Where?­

“MORALLY GOOD AND BAD”   

OR PRUDENTIALLY..

VS.

INTELLECTUALLY OR “EPISTEMOLOGICALY” OR RATIONALLY GOOD OR BAD.. 

NEW DUE DATES; THIS WILL BE UPDATED IN TURNITIN ASAP THIS AFTERNOON. 

1. Ch. 4, "The Natural Order," is now due by this Wednesday, 2/19 by 11 AM.

2. Harvard writing book; first section 0-56;due on the Monday, the 24th by 11 AM.

3. New assignment, now due by Friday February 21 by 11 AM.

This might partially overlap with and build on your previous writings about Ch. 3, 4, as well as Ch. 2. 

Your assignment is to clearly and accurately explain one of the arguments for God's existence discussed in these chapters, in a manner so that someone who was not familiar with these arguments would understand. You must also explain at least two objections and whether you think the argument is sound or not. 

Your writing must have these section in the paper; these sections must explicitly be in the paper


A Title (Give your paper an informative title)

I. Introduction
Use these exact words: In this paper, I will discuss the argument for God's existence known as _(give the name of the argument). I will first state the argument and explain each premise. I will then explain at least two objections to the argument. In my conclusion I will explain whether whether I think the argument is sound or not, which will involve explaining whether these objections are strong or not.   

II. The Argument

(fill in this section)

III. Objections to the Argument

(fill in this section)

IV. Conclusion

(fill in this section)

Assignments

Reminders of assignments and new assignments:

1. The writing on Ch. 4, "The Natural Order," was due by Wednesday at 11. Due to the snow days, however, I'll extend the due date on that until Monday, Feb. 17. Due via Turnitin.

2. Due next Wednesday, February 19 [NOTE THE CORRECTION], detailed, detailed, detailed summary of the Harvard Writing book, pp. 0-56. The Turnitin slot is now open. 

3. New assignment, also due by Wednesday February 19.

This might partially overlap with and build on your previous writings about Ch. 3, 4, as well as Ch. 2. 

Your assignment is to clearly and accurately explain one of the arguments for God's existence discussed in these chapters, in a manner so that someone who was not familiar with these arguments would understand. You must also explain at least two objections and whether you think the argument is sound or not. 

Your writing must have these section in the paper; these sections must explicitly be in the paper


A Title (Give your paper an informative title)

I. Introduction
Use these exact words: In this paper, I will discuss the argument for God's existence known as _(give the name of the argument). I will first state the argument and explain each premise. I will then explain at least two objections to the argument. In my conclusion I will explain whether whether I think the argument is sound or not, which will involve explaining whether these objections are strong or not.   

II. The Argument

(fill in this section)

III. Objections to the Argument

(fill in this section)

IV. Conclusion

(fill in this section)