- Science term paper topics that give you unique ideas for your research on anything from global warming, human genome, minerals, neandertals, and 100's more topic ideas.
Philosophy of Religion ? Questions such as these have perplexed humans since the first moment we were capable of asking them. Now in Philosophy of Religion you can explore the questions of divine existence with the tools of epistemology, the branch of philosophy that concerns itself with what we can know. In Professor James Hall, Chair of the Department of Philosophy at the University of Richmond, you have an unusually qualified teacher. The son of a Baptist minister (who himself later became a university professor), Professor Hall first trained at a seminary before taking his doctorate in philosophy and embarking on a teaching career nearly 4. He announces early in the series where he stands on these issues; this is not a course with a hidden agenda, or an exercise in polemic. The story of Professor Hall's own background and philosophical journey, which he shares with you in Lecture 3, is far too interesting for us to divulge.) Audio.
With the retreat of positivism in the 1970s, philosophers ofreligion re-introduced concepts of God, competing views of the sacred,and the like, which were backed by arguments that appealed not tonarrow scientific confirmation but to broad considerations ofcoherence, breadth of explanation, simplicity, religious experience, andother factors. But before turning to this material, it is important toconsider a debate within philosophy of religion that was largelyinspired by the Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein.
File magazine acclaimed him as . Equally clear is his passion for teaching it. Through his reading of such texts as the original minutes of the Inquisition, for example, he is able to grant you the rare opportunity to read between the lines of what was written. In addition, the professor holds faculty appointments in three diverse fields—history of science, philosophy, and chemistry—which allow him to synthesize materials across disciplines and convey the big picture with stunning clarity. His lectures are colored with the passion of someone who has devoted a lifetime to exploring the interaction of science and religion. Moving from the early centuries of the Christian era and the Middle Ages to our own day, he exposes the truth about the Galileo Affair and provides a revealing picture of the circuslike Scopes Trial. You will share St.
This Wittgensteinian challenge, then, appears to place in check muchof the way philosophers in the west have approached religion. When,for example, Descartes, Locke, Leibniz, Berkeley, and Hume argued forand against the justification of belief in God, metaphysics was at theforefront. They were interested in the best possible arguments for andagainst God's existence. The same preoccupation with the truthor falsehood of religious belief is also central to ancient andmedieval philosophical reflection about the Divine. When Aristotle andThomas Aquinas articulated arguments for God's existence theywere engaged in full-fledged metaphysics.
- Philosophy and ethics research papers discuss what people believe, such as religion, which offers rules of morality that they feel they are obligated to follow.
This essay will consider the perspectives of Marx and Engels upon the role of Religion and will also discuss how relevant there argument is in the 21st century....
- Metaphysics Philosophy research papers examine the branch of philosophy that look into the basic questions regarding existence, the nature of being, and the world around us.
- Research papers on philosophy of religion discuss the examination of the central themes and concepts that are essential to the worldâ religious traditions.
Terms applied both to God and to any aspect of the world have beenclassified as either univocal (sharing the same sense),equivocal (used in different senses), oranalogical. There is a range of accounts of analogouspredication, but the most common—and the one assumedhere—is that terms are used analogously when their use indifferent cases (John limps and the argument limps) is based on whatis believed to be a resemblance. It seems clear that many terms usedto describe God in theistic traditions are used analogously, as whenGod is referred to as a father, shepherd, or fountain. More difficultto classify are descriptions of God as good, personal, knowing,omnipresent, and creative. Heated philosophical and theologicaldisputes centre on unpacking the meaning of such descriptions,disputes that are often carried out with the use of thoughtexperiments.
â In The Republic, Plato’s greatest dialogue, a search for the definition of justice occupies a prominent place in the discussion that gives the world the Theory of Forms, the Allegory of the Cave, and the idea of Philosopher Kings (giving hints to the biases of Plato).
Most philosophy of religion in the west has focused on differentversions of theism. Ancient philosophy of religion wrestled with thecredibility of monotheism and polytheism in opposition to skepticismand very primitive naturalistic schemes. For example, Platoargued that the view that God is singularly good should be preferred tothe portrait of the gods that was articulated in Greek poetictradition, according to which there are many gods, often imperfect andsubject to vice and ignorance. The emergence and development ofJudaism, Christianity, and Islam on a global scale secured thecentrality of theism for philosophical enquiry, but the relevance of aphilosophical exploration of theism is not limited to those interestedin these religions and the cultures in which they flourish. Whiletheism has generally flourished in religious traditions amid religiouspractices, one may be a theist without adopting any religion whatever,and one may find theistic elements (however piecemeal) in Confucianism,Hinduism, some versions of Mahayana Buddhism, as well as in thereligions of some smaller scale societies. The debate over theismalso has currency for secular humanism and religious forms of atheismas in Theravada Buddhist philosophy. Consider first thephilosophical project of articulating theism and then the philosophy ofdivine attributes.
Various replies to the freedom-foreknowledge debate have beengiven. Some adopt compatibilism, affirming the compatibility offree will and determinism, and conclude that foreknowledge is no morethreatening to freedom than determinism. While some prominentphilosophical theists in the past have taken this route (mostdramatically Jonathan Edwards in the eighteenth century), this seems tobe the minority position in philosophy of religion today (exceptionsinclude Paul Helm and Lynne Baker). A second positionadheres to the libertarian outlook, which insists that freedom involvesa radical, indeterminist exercise of power, and concludes that Godcannot know future free action. What prevents such philosophersfrom denying that God is omniscient is that they contend there are notruths about future free actions, or that while there aretruths about the future, God freely decides not to know them in order topreserve free choice. On the first view, prior to someone'sdoing a free action, there is no fact of the matter that he or she willdo a given act. This is in keeping with a traditional, butcontroversial, interpretation of Aristotle's philosophy of timeand truth. Aristotle may have thought it was neither true norfalse prior to a given sea battle whether a given side would winit. Some theists, such as Richard Swinburne, adopt this linetoday, holding that the future cannot be known. If it cannot beknown for metaphysical reasons, then omniscience can be analyzed asknowing all that it is possible to know. That God cannot knowfuture free action is no more of a mark against God's being omniscientthan God's inability to make square circles is a mark against God'sbeing omnipotent. Other philosophers deny the original paradox. Theyinsist that God's foreknowledge is compatible with libertarian freedomand seek to resolve the quandary by claiming that God is not bound intime (God does not so much foreknow the future as God knows what forus is the future from an eternal viewpoint) and by arguing that theunique vantage point of an omniscient God prevents any impingement onfreedom. God can simply know the future without this having to begrounded on an established, determinate future. But this only works ifthere is no necessity of eternity analogous to the necessity of thepast. Why think that we have any more control over God's timelessbelief than over God's past belief? If not, then there is an exactlyparallel dilemma of timeless knowledge. For outstanding currentanalysis of freedom and foreknowledge, see the work of LindaZagzebski.