Philosophy 311 — The Philosophy of Religion
Section 01: TR
Overview: The philosophy of religion aims at critical understanding of the fundamental concepts and doctrines widely held by religious beliefs of various types. It also aims to discover what reasons we have for believing or disbelieving those doctrines. In pursuit of these aims, this course will examine philosophical discussions (by thinkers past and present) of such topics as: the attributes of God, arguments for and against God’s existence, religious experience and miracles, the possibility of life after death, the contrast between faith and reason, and religious pluralism. The goal of the course is to equip students with the knowledge and critical skills needed to formulate well-reasoned responses to the course’s questions.
Professor: Craig Duncan
Email: cduncan@ithaca.edu
Homepage: http://www.ithaca.edu/faculty/cduncan
Coursepage: http://www.ithaca.edu/faculty/cduncan/311/311.htm
Office hours and location: Dillingham 213, times to be announced
Office phone: 274-3580
Course Materials:
Course Requirements:
·
Two 5-7 page papers. Each paper counts 15% toward your overall
grade. The first paper is due in-class
on Tuesday, Feb.
14th. The second paper is due in-class on Tuesday, March 28th.
·
One 10-12 page paper: A 10-12
page paper on a topic of your choosing is due in-class on Thursday, April 25th. The paper
grade counts 25% toward your overall grade. This paper can be an extension of one of your
earlier 5 page papers, if you choose.
·
Final Exam: There
will be a final exam on Friday,
May 5th,
·
Reading Summary Cards. This course will succeed only if
everyone keeps up with the reading, of which there is a lot. For this reason, at the start of each class
period (with the exception of the three days you have papers due) you will be
expected to hand in a 4x6 notecard containing a summary of the main points of
the day’s assigned reading. You may use
the front and back if you wish. Also, at
the end of the notecard, please write one question you would like to ask of the
author, were you able to talk to him/her.
I will not give your summaries a letter grade, though I will examine
them and keep track of who hands them in (and who is not putting much serious
thought into them, if this is true of anyone).
Each person will be permitted to miss three cards no questions
asked. Beyond that, every card
missed—for whatever reason—will drop your participation grade by 10%. No cards will be accepted after the class
period has ended. On classes for
which more than one reading is assigned, you may choose which reading to
summarize, unless your instructor tells you otherwise.
·
Participation: Philosophy
cannot be passively learned. It requires
active engagement, both with the texts and with individuals in the form of
discussion. For this reason class
participation counts for 15% of your overall grade. In order to get a good participation grade,
you must have excellent attendance, do the assigned reading for each class
period, complete the summary cards, and regularly take an active role in class
discussions. (Good attendance is not
enough; someone who has perfect attendance but does not regularly take part in
class should expect no higher than a C participation grade.)
Note:
All papers and the exam must be completed in order to pass the course.
Important dates:
Tues. 2/14 First short paper due
Tues. 3/28 Second short paper due
Tues. 4/25 Long paper due
Fri. 5/5
Reading Assignments:
Reading assignments will be announced during class one or two class periods ahead of time. If you miss class, it is your responsibility to find out the reading assignment, by contacting me or another classmate.
I. God’s Attributes
Rowe, Chapter One
Thomas Aquinas, “Is God’s Power Limited?” [P, 251-253]
George Mavrodes, “Some Puzzles Concerning Omnipotence” [P, 253-255]
II. The
Ontological Argument
Rowe, Chapter Three
St. Anselm, “The Ontological Argument” [P, 70-72]
Immanuel Kant, “A Critique of the Ontological Argument” [P, 73-76]
Harry Frankfurt, “The Logic of Omnipotence” [P]
III. The Cosmological Argument
Rowe, Chapter Two
Samuel Clark, “The Argument From Contingency” [P, 5-6]
William Lane Craig, “The Kalām Cosmological Argument” [P]
Paul Draper, “A Critique of the Kalām Cosmological Argument” [P, 42-47]
Gabriele Veneziano, “They Myth of the Beginning of Time” [CP]
IV. The
Argument from Design
A. The Traditional Argument
Rowe, Chapter Four
William Paley, “The Watch and the Watchmaker” [P, 50-52]
David Hume, “A Critique of the Design Argument” [P, 52-58]
B. Darwinian Evolution and Its Detractors
Richard Norman, “Why Science Undermines Religion,” pp. 26-40, first paragraph [CP]
Michael Behe, “Darwin Under the Microscope” [W]
David Quammen, “Nasty Habits” [CP]
Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne, “One Side Can Be Wrong” [W]
Skim read: John McDonald, “A Reducibly Complex Mousetrap”[W]
Win Ace, “Organisms that Look Designed” [W]
C. Is Evolution Compatible with Belief in God?
Alfred Lord Tennyson, “In Memoriam” [W]
William Blake, “Tiger” [W]
Richard Norman, “Why Science Undermines Religion,” pp. 40-55 [CP]
Kenneth Miller, “Finding Darwin’s God” [W]
D. New Twists on the Argument from Design
Richard Swinburne, “The Argument from Design” [P, 59-68]
Martin Rees, “Laws and Bylaws in the Multiverse” [CP]
V. Religious Experience
Rowe, Chapter Five
Various authors, “Selections of Mystical Experiences” [P, 92-93]
William James, “Mysticism” [P, 93-108]
VI. Faith and Reason
Rowe, Chapter Six
Blaise Pascal, “The Wager” [P, 361-363]
W.K. Clifford, “The Ethics of Belief” [P, 363-367]
William James, “The Will to Believe” [P, 368-376]
Kelly James Clark, “Without Evidence or Argument,” pp. 1-12 only [W]
In-class video: The
Power of Belief
Gregory S. Paul, “Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies” [W]
Anonymous, “MIT Economist:
Religion is Good for You” [W]
VII. The Problem of Evil
Rowe, Chapter Seven
David Hume, “The Argument from Evil” [P, 141-146]
John Hick, “Evil and Soul-Making” [P, 152-156]
Edward H. Madden and Peter H. Hare, “A Critique of Hick’s Theodicy” [P, 156-159]
Robert Wennberg, “Animal Suffering and the Problem of Evil” [CP]
Karma and Evil [CP – full title to be announced]
VIII. Naturalistic Challenges to Religious Belief
Rowe, Chapter Eight
Sigmund Freud, “The Future of an Illusion” [P, 108-113]
Karl Marx, “Religion as Opium: Man Makes Religion” [CP]
IX. Miracles
Rowe, Chapter Nine
David Hume, “Against Miracles” [P, 261-269]
Richard Swineburne, “For the Possibility of Miracles” [P, 269-275]
X. Death
and Immortality
Rowe, Chapter Ten
Plato, “Immortality of the Soul” [P, 310-314]
O. R. Jones and Peter Smith, “Difficulties for the Dualist” [CP]
John Hick, “Immortality and Resurrection” [P, 317-323]
Prasannatma Das, “A Hindu Theory of Life, Death, and Reincarnation” [P, 333-336]
XI. The
Pluralistic Challenge
Rowe, Chapter Twelve
John Hick, “Religious Pluralism and Ultimate Reality” [P, 499-507]
Alvin Plantinga, “A Defense of Religious Pluralism” [P, 507-520]
Dalai Lama, “Buddhism, Christianity, and the Prospects for World Religion” [P, 528-533]
XII.
Religion and Ethics
Plato, “Morality and Religion” [P, 549-550]
Bertrand Russell, “A Free Man’s Worship” [P, 569-574]
Lois Hope Walker, “Religion Gives Meaning to Life” [P, 574-577]
Teaching Policies:
Attendance
During classtime I will often introduce material that is not covered in the reading assignments. You will be held responsible for knowing this material. If you do not come to class, you will not know this material, and your performance on essays and exams will suffer. So come to class. Also, attendance is a significant part of your class participation grade. Unexcused absences will hurt your participation grade. Note, too, that very good attendance by itself does not guarantee a high participation grade; participation during class is necessary too. For example, someone who had perfect attendance but who rarely volunteered comments in class would probably get no higher than a C+ participation grade.
Academic Conduct
Students are expected to conform to the Standards of Academic Conduct printed in the Student Handbook. Please familiarize yourself with these. Violations will be reported to the Ithaca College Conduct Review Board. Additionally, you will receive a grade of zero on any assignment that is not completed according to these standards. On that same note, please turn off your cell phones before entering the classroom. Plagiarism is one very serious violation of these standards. I will not tolerate it. There are good reasons for my zero-tolerance policy—reasons well summarized by the philosopher Hugh LaFollette, from whom I quote below:
Why Shouldn't I Plagiarize?
(1) It undercuts the aims of education. If you plagiarize you will not learn the skills you should learn—you are merely copying someone else's words and ideas—and you already knew how to do that.
(2) It is theft. And all theft is wrong, whether or an idea or an object.
(3) You harm other students. By plagiarizing you make professors more suspicious of students. This encourages them to make assignment that are plagiarism-proof rather than ones that are educationally sound.
(4) You will get caught. Think about it for a minute: if you plagiarize from a good source—one that is likely to help you with your grade—the prof may well know (or can easily find) the source. And if your writing style changes drastically from sentence to sentence or from paper to exam, that will be obvious even to a casual observer. To plagiarize well—to plagiarize in a way that is likely to land you a decent grade and minimize the chance you will get caught—you would have to know the material so well that it would easier—and more educationally beneficial—to write the essay yourself.[1]