Is Nothing Sacred? FREQUENTLY-CITED COLLECTIONS. Topics in the Philosophy of Religion JOURNALS: ABBREVIATIONS GENERAL & INTRODUCTORY BOOKS

Transcription

1 Is Nothing Sacred? Topics in the Philosophy of Religion FREQUENTLY-CITED COLLECTIONS These collections will be referred to in the reading lists by their editors names only: Stuart C. Brown Reason and Religion (Cornell) Steven M. Cahn & David Shatz Contemporary Philosophy of Religion (OUP) John Donnelly Logical Analysis and Contemporary Theism (Fordham) Antony Flew & Alasdair MacIntyre New Essays in Philosophical Theology (SCM Press) Paul Helm Divine Commands and Morality (OUP) Ann Loades & Loyal D. Rue Contemporary Classics in Philosophy of Religion (Open Court) Basil Mitchell The Philosophy of Religion (OUP) T.V. Morris The Concept of God (OUP) Eleonore Stump & Michael J. Murray Philosophy of Religion: The Big Questions (Blackwell) Richard Swinburne Miracles (Macmillan) JOURNALS: ABBREVIATIONS A.P.Q. Aust.J.Phil. Can.J.Phil. I.J.Phil.Rel. I.J.Rel. P.A.S. P.A.S.S. Phil.Rev. Rel.Stud. Stud.Leib. = American Philosophical Quarterly = Australasian Journal of Philosophy = Canadian Journal of Philosophy = International Journal for the Philosophy of Religion = International Journal of Religion = Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society = Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume = Philosophical Review = Religious Studies = Studia Leibnitiana Peter J. King peter.king@philosophy.ox.ac.uk WWW: GENERAL & INTRODUCTORY BOOKS I ll generally not include references to the following books in the reading lists, unless there s some special reason for doing so. For any essay topic, choose at most one of these you shouldn t use more than one introductory book. Stephen R.L. Clark Mysteries of Religion (Blackwell) an idiosyncratic book, in terms both of its content and of its approach. Worth a look. Brian Davies An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion (OUP) a clear, wideranging (but often rather skimpy) introduction from a Christian (Thomist) position. John Hick Philosophy of Religion (Prentice-Hall) old, but still worth a look. On the plus side, it s laid out clearly, covering most of the standard and a couple of non-standard (especially for its time) topics. Walter Kaufmann Critique of Religion and Philosophy (Princeton) an idiosyncratic look at many of the topics we ll be covering (and many that we ll not be). I m personally out of sympathy with much of what he says about the nature of philosophy, but see what you think.

2 J.L. Mackie The Miracle of Theism (OUP) perhaps the best general book available (and certainly the best book Mackie ever wrote). Not precisely an introduction, though it can be used as one. Kai Nielsen An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion (Macmillan) this is a book firmly in the most analytic of analytic traditions; it s clear, though some might find it heavy going at times. It limits itself largely to matters of language and belief. Michael Peterson, William Hasker, Bruce Reichenbach, & David Basinger Reason and Religious Belief (OUP) this covers just about every topic in this hand-out, often clearly and interestingly. It has its (very) weak points, though (see, for example, the section on the argument to design), and caution is needed. Charles Taliaferro Keith E. Yandell Contemporary Philosophy of Religion (Blackwell) an interesting approach to many of the central questions; it suffers slightly from being aimed more at the U.S. than at the English undergraduate course, but that shouldn t really worry you. Philosophy of Religion (Routledge) much more pluralistic in approach than the other introductions, and so well worth a look, but sometimes rather heavy going. P Some notes on writing essays HILOSOPHY is like mathematics in that you can t just set down your answer you have to show how you got there. A common fault in philosophy essays is that the writer is in such a hurry to get her ideas down to attack a hated position, to state an attractive theory that she forgets to argue. Without arguments, all you have is a set of opinions, however interesting; with arguments, you have philosophy. With good arguments, you have good philosophy. S TRUCTURE. But perhaps the most common cause of problems with essays (apart from the amount of work put into them) is poor structure. A badly structured essay doesn t only make it difficult for the reader to follow what you re saying it can make it difficult for you to keep track of what you re saying, leading to repetition, contradiction, and irrelevance. Make an essay plan before you start writing, and try to stick to it. It shouldn t be too detailed, otherwise it ll be too rigid; most, if not all, plans will fall into three parts, including an introduction to and explanation of the problems, a discussion of the main arguments, and some sort of conclusion. Whatever your position, be sure to treat the positions with which you disagree as fully and sympathetically as possible before you start to criticise them; apart from anything else this will help you to avoid knocking down straw men. Don t strive too hard for originality and new ideas; these will come (if they do) as you think and write about other people s ideas and arguments. If you do come up with what you think is an original idea or argument, don t be too protective towards it; be at least as critical of it as you would be of anyone else s. C RITICAL APPARATUS. All quotations should be given references clear and detailed enough to allow the reader to go straight to the original source. This will normally involve author, title, and page number; in the case of historical or translated works, you should be sure to give the edition you re using, and if possible use a standard reference system (often found in the margins or at the top of each page). If you re unsure, check to see how other authors do it, or ask me. Never use other writers words or even ideas without acknowledgment (see under plagiarism below). Details should be given in a separate bibliography; the reference in the text is to author and page. L ANGUAGE. Clarity and precision often depend upon careful use of language and this includes spelling and grammar. Don t underestimate the problems caused by misspelling (the differences between intention and intension, or ingenious and ingenuous, are more important than the single letters involved). This is even more true of grammar and punctuation. Keep your language simple: don t use three syllables where one will do, or had it not been written by him instead of if he hadn t written it. Make sure that quotations fit into their new contexts (avoid, for example, Descartes said that I can be certain ; write either Descartes said: I can be certain or Descartes said that he could be certain ). P P LAGIARISM. Your essays must be your own work. The reading is there to guide you, to suggest avenues of thought, to offer explanations of difficult arguments or ideas; it is not there to be repeated parrot-fashion. If you need to quote from another writer, mark the quotation clearly (see above, under Critical apparatus) but again, don t overdo it. RACTICAL MATTERS. N.B.: occasionally I give more than one essay question; these are alternatives, so choose one. Don t read too much (or, of course, too little); three or four items from the relevant reading list is usually about right (one introductory or general work, and two or three others). If you want to (or have to) go outside the reading I suggest, talk to me about it; too often I find that essays have suffered because students have depended upon what are frankly bad and misleading books. If you use a word-processor (and I d advise it), use the spell-checker, but don t rely upon it; read through (preferably aloud) what you ve written, at least once. Don t bother with grammar-checkers I ve yet to see one that works properly.

3 Truth & Pluralism a) Does it make sense to say that all religions are true? b) On what grounds (if any) could it be argued that just one religion is true and the others false? Peter Byrne Religion and the religions (in The Study of Religion, Traditional and New Religion, edd Stewart Sutherland & Peter Clarke) Gavin D Costa The impossibility of a pluralist view of religions (Rel.Stud. 32, 1996) see also Hick s reply, below Jerome Gellman Religious diversity and the epistemic justification of religious belief (Faith & Philosophy 10, 1993; & in Stump & Murray) I. Hamnett [ed.] Religious Pluralism and Unbelief John Hick Religious pluralism : a reply to Gavin D Costa (Rel.Stud. 33, 1997) On grading religions (Rel.Stud. 17, 1981; & in Loades & Rue) Harold A. Netland Dissonant Voices: Religious Pluralism and the Question of Truth Geoffrey Parrinder Comparative Religion not a philosophical work, but interesting as a classic text in its field Philip L. Quinn Religious pluralism and religious relativism (in Relativism and Religion, ed Charles M. Lewis) Glyn Richards Towards a Theology of Religions chapters 9 & 10, but you may need to skip back to refer to earlier chapters Arvind Sharma The Philosophy of Religion: A Buddhist Perspective chapter 8 R. Swinburne Faith and Reason chapters 6 7 Roger Trigg Rationality and Religion passim, but especially chapter 3 H. Vroom No Other Gods *** Pantheism Does pantheism leave any room for religious concepts such as worship or prayer? Jonathan Bennett A Study of Spinoza s Ethics passim Stephen R.L. Clark God, Religion, and Reality chapter 7 R.J. Delahunty Spinoza pp Georg Hegel Encyclopaedia of the Philosophical Sciences Michael P. Levine Pantheism Richard Mason The God of Spinoza esp. pp Robert Oakes Does traditional theism entail pantheism? (A.P.Q. 20, 1983; & in Morris) H.P. Owen Concepts of Deity pp Baruch Spinoza Ethics Charles Taliaferro Contemporary Philosophy of Religion pp W.J. Wainwright God s body (Journal of the American Academy of Religion XLII, 1974; & in Morris) *** Be careful to keep pantheism and panentheism clearly distinguished (though that doesn t mean that you can t deal with both of them in the essay). The term pantheism is probably best reserved for the essentially non-theistic view that everything in the world is god and god is everything in the world, of which a prime example is Spinoza s position; the term panentheism refers to the essentially theistic view that everything in the world is god but god isn t (just) everything in the world that is, the world is merely part of god. Having made this distinction, it s important to bear in mind that there are many forms of both pantheism and panentheism, and that they differ deeply. Chapter One of Levine s book should help here. Many of the above readings concern the issues of pluralism and of relativism; be careful to keep your focus firmly on the former. Be careful, too, not to wander into the admittedly fascinating field of comparative religion. The details of the many different religions are not relevant, here, so much as the fact of the existence of so many religious systems, their general nature, and the grounds upon which their claims are made.

4 Ontological Arguments a) The ontological argument fails because it presupposes god s existence? Is this true of all or any of the versions of the argument? If it is, can the fault be repaired? b) Choose one version of the ontological argument, and attempt to defend it against its critics. René Descartes Meditations V William P. Alston The ontological argument revisited (Phil.Rev. LXXIX, 1960; & in Doney; & in Plantinga) Jonathan Barnes The Ontological Argument see especially pages 15 18, T. Chambers On behalf of the devil: a parody of Anselm revisited (PAS C, 2000) John Cottingham Descartes chapter 3 J.N. Findlay Can god s existence be disproved? (Mind 1948; & in his Language, Truth, and Value, & in Plantinga, & in Flew & MacIntyre) interesting mainly for his ontological argument against the existence of god J.C.A. Gaskin Hume s Philosophy of Religion chapter 4 John Hick Ontological argument for the existence of god (in The Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, ed. Edwards) Gerard J. Hughes The Nature of God chapter 1 and passim Anthony Kenny Reason and Religion chapters 3 & 4 Anthony O Hear Experience, Explanation, and Faith chapter 4:3 Alvin Planting The Nature of Necessity chapter 10 [ed.] The Ontological Argument readings from the main historical philosophers, plus some important 20th-century papers James F. Ross On proofs for the existence of god (Monist 54:2, 1970; & in Donnelly) R. Swinburne The Coherence of Theism chapter 14 Bernard Williams Descartes chapter 5, pp The various advocates of the ontological argument anticipate some objections, and attempt to meet them; what are they, and do they succeed? What objections do you think they haven t anticipated? Not anticipating an objection isn t the same as not being able to meet it; what answers might they have offered? Of what kind of god do the ontological arguments claim to prove the existence? How useful would such a concept of god be to religion? As with any essay, be sure that you ve not only understood but fully and clearly explained every argument and position that you discuss, including the version or versions of the ontological argument with which you re concerned. Cosmological Arguments a) Does the cosmological argument, in any of its versions, provide good reason for believing in the existence of god? b) Could the world have always existed? Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologiae 1a,2,3 Patterson Brown Infinite causal regression (Phil.Rev. LXXV, 11966; & in Kenny [ed.] Aquinas) F.C. Copleston Aquinas chapter 3 William Lane Craig & Quentin Smith Theism, Atheism, and Big Bang Cosmology A.C. Ewing Two proofs of god s existence (Rel.Stud. I, 1966; & in his Non-Linguistic Philosophy) J.C.A. Gaskin Hume s Philosophy of Religion chapter 4 R.W. Hepburn From world to god (Mind 72, 1963; & in Mitchell) G.W. Leibniz On the radical origination of things [G VII, 302 8] Anthony O Hear Experience, Explanation, and Faith chapter 4:2 William L. Rowe Two criticisms of the cosmological argument (Monist 54:3, 1970; & in Donnelly) The Cosmological Argument Quentin Smith & L. Nathan Oaklander Time, Change, and Freedom Part I R. Swinburne The Existence of God chapter 7 Keith Ward Religion & Creation part IV (you might also be interested in other parts of the book especially part I, which examines four scriptural traditions) Pay close attention to the wording of the question; it doesn t ask whether the cosmological argument proves the existence of god (though if it does, then that is of course also a reason to believe). Does it make sense to criticise cosmological arguments on scientific grounds? Does any of the versions actually depend upon a particular scientific view of the world? What relevance does Hume s discussion of causation have? Perhaps most importantly, what kind of first cause do the cosmological arguments, even if successful, demonstrate? Is it what they set out or claim to have demonstrated? For question b. you might also have a look at the reading for the questions on God, Space, Time, and Eternity below.

5 Descartes Argument from Ideas Outline the structure of the argument used by Descartes in Meditation III, attempting to be as clear as possible about the assumptions upon which the it rests and any subsidiary arguments used by Descartes to defend these assumptions. Does the argument work? If not, where does it go wrong? René Descartes Discourse on the Method IV Meditations III The Principles of Philosophy I, John Cottingham Descartes chapter 3 E.M. Curley Descartes Against the Sceptics chapter 6 Georges Dicker Descartes chapter 3 John Hospers An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis part 7, chapter 21 [ed.] Readings in Introductory Philosophical Analysis part 6, especially chapter 18 (for which see also Mitchell) Bernard Williams Descartes chapter 5 *** The same general points apply here as to the previous two topics. It might be useful to consider how exactly Descartes argument differs from the cosmological arguments with which it s so often classed. It s important to be clear as to the metaphysical and conceptual framework within which Descartes argument is situated. In particular, make sure that you ve understood (and that you explain) the notion of degrees of reality, the Causal Adequacy Principle, and the distinction between formal and objective reality. Unless you re absolutely clear as to the rôle in the argument of each of these, you ll not be able to understand why the argument is supposed to work, nor why it doesn t. It might seem obvious to you where Descartes goes wrong. In fact it isn t at all obvious so if you think that it is, you ve probably got the wrong answer. The Design Argument a) Examine Hume s arguments about the existence of god. What precisely is he trying to show? b) Are there good grounds to think that the Big Bang was fine tuned to give a life-supporting universe? W.P. Alston Teleological argument for the existence of god (in The Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, ed. Edwards) René Descartes Discourse on Method IV John Barrow & Frank Tipler The Anthropic Cosmological Principle A.C. Ewing Two proofs of god s existence (Rel.Stud. I, 1966; & in his Non-Linguistic Philosophy) Antony Flew David Hume: Philosopher of Moral Science chapter 4 Hume s philosophy of religion (in Philosophers Ancient and Modern ed. Godfrey Vesey) J.C.A. Gaskin Hume s Philosophy of Religion chapters 2 & 7 David Hume Enquiry especially sections VII, X, XII, and pp ( Additional Note ) Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (there are extracts in Stump & Murray) Anthony Kenny Reason and Religion chapter 5 What is Faith? chapter 6 John Leslie [ed.] Physical Cosmology and Philosophy Ninian Smart The existence of god (in Flew & MacIntyre) Tom Stoppard Jumpers especially pp R. Swinburne The argument from design (Philosophy 43, 1968; & in Donnelly, & in Stump & Murray) Bernard Williams Hume on religion (in David Hume: A Symposium, ed. Pears) Look at the Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. Which are the most powerful arguments? Can anything be salvaged from Hume s attack? Can the believer accept that we can make no extrapolation at all from humans to god e.g., that what we imagine to be a superior perfection, may really be a defect? Can one get round the point, made by both Hume and Stoppard, that there seems no reason why a creator need be benevolent, nor a benevolent god a creator? (Don t get into the details of the problem of evil, which is the subject of the next essay). Out of interest, note the mirror of the design argument: there are apparently two sorts of thing in the world things designed by minds and things not designed by minds; in fact we can argue that the latter things are in fact not mind-designed either by invoking physicalist accounts of the mind, reducing everything to the same, non-designed status. Is this any better than the design argument? This topic has connections with a later topic: Creationism and Biology.

6 The Problem of Evil I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. The Judæo-Christian god, in Isaiah XLV 7 Richard Swinburne The problem of evil (in Brown, & in Cahn & Shatz) Providence and the Problem of Evil Natural evil and the possibility of knowledge (in Stump & Murray) John Wisdom God and evil (Mind 44, 1935) a) Could a god have created beings who had free will but never went wrong? b) Might this be the best of all possible worlds? Would the problem of evil be solved if it were? M. McCord Adams Horrendous evils and the goodness of god (PASS LXIII, 1989; & in Stump & Murray) Robert M. Adams Must god create the best? (Phil.Rev. 81:3, 1972; & in Morris) Paul Draper Pain and pleasure: an evidential problem for theists (Noûs 23, 1989; & in Stump & Murray) George Gale On what god chose: perfection and god s freedom (Stud.Leib. 8, 1976) Arthur L. Herman The Problem of Evil and Indian Thought Indian Theodicy: Samkara and Ramanuja on Brahma Sutra II (Philosophy East West 21, 1971) J.C.A. Gaskin Hume s Philosophy of Religion chapter 3 John Hick An Irenæan theodicy (in Encountering Evil: Live Options in Theodicy, ed. Davis; & in Stump & Murray) God and the Universe of Faiths papers 4 & 5 Peter van Inwagen The magnitude, duration, and distribution of evil: a theodicy (in Philosophical Topics 16, 1988; & in Stump & Murray) Philip J. Ivanhoe Ethics in the Confucian Tradition chapter III (not strictly concerned with the problem of evil, but with a closely related issue in the thought of Mencius and Wang Yang-Ming) James A. Keller The hiddenness of god and the problem of evil (I.J.Rel. 37, 1995) Anthony Kenny The God of the Philosophers chapter 7 (& in Morris as The definition of omnipotence ) Divine foreknowledge and human freedom (in Kenny [ed.] Aquinas) Peter J. King The problem of evil (Philosophical Writings 9, 1998; & on the W-WW at: <URL: G.W. Leibniz Discourse on metaphysics (especially 30 31); Necessary and contingent truths ; On freedom J.L. Mackie Evil and omnipotence (Mind 64, 1955; & in Mitchell) William E. Mann God s freedom, human freedom, and god s responsibility for sin (in Divine & Human Action, ed. Thomas V. Morris) T.V. Morris Duty and divine goodness (A.P.Q. 21:3, 1984; & in Morris) Michael J. Murray Coercion and the hiddenness of god (APQ30, 1993; & in Stump & Murray) Alvin Plantinga The free will defence (in Philosophy in America, ed. Black, & in Mitchell) On being evidentially challenged (in The Evidential Argument from Evil, ed. Howard-Snyder, & in Stump & Murray) Arvind Sharma The Philosophy of Religion: A Buddhist Perspective chapter 4 Quentin Smith & L. Nathan Oaklander Time, Change, and Freedom dialogue 10 Eleonore Stump The problem of evil (Faith and Philosophy 2, 1985; & in Stump & Murray) This is a topic in which it s easy to get lost; try to stick to a couple of the main defences against the problem of evil (or even just to the free-will defence), rather than trying to cover all the different approaches in turn. Any willingness to discard or significantly weaken one of the main traditional attributes of god (omniscience, omnipotence, benevolence, or rôle [as creator or actor] in the world) defuses the problem, so it s definitely not (at least not simply) an argument against the existence of god. Note that, though the problem arises in its most acute form, only for a rather specific notion of god the Judæo-Christian notion (since the Holocaust it has become an important question in Jewish thought), it is of interest to members of most of not all religious traditions. I ve included in the reading list some papers and books concerning non-judæo-christian discussions, but don t get too side-tracked by the specifics of any one approach or religious context; the issues with which we re concerned are at a high level of abstraction, and your discussion should stay at that level as far as possible.

7 Morality and Religion Can sense be made of the claim that ethical terms like good and bad can or must be defined in terms of religion? Robert M. Adams A modified divine command theory of ethical wrongness (Religion and Morality, edd Outka & Reeder; & in Helm) Divine command metaethics modified again (Journal of Religious Ethics 7, 1979; & in Stump & Murray; extract in Helm) Baruch Brody Morality and Religion Reconsidered (in his Readings in the Philosophy of Religion; & in Helm) W.K. Frankena Is Morality Logically Dependent on Religion? (Religion and Morality, edd Outka & Reeder; & in Helm) Peter Geach God and the Soul chapter 9; extract (pp ) in Helm Brad Hooker Cudworth and Quinn (Analysis 61, 2001) Peter J. King Morality and religion: I on the W-WW at: <URL: N. Kretzmann Abraham, Isaac, and Euthyphro: god and the basis of morality (in Stump & Murray) C. B. Martin The perfect good (Aust.J.Phil., 1955; & in Flew & MacIntyre) D.Z. Phillips God and ought (Christian Ethics and Contemporary Philosophy, ed. Ramsay; & in Helm) Plato Euthyphro (any edition, really; the Penguin version can be found in The Last Days of Socrates) Philip L. Quinn Religious obedience and moral autonomy (Rel.Stud. 11, 1975; & in Helm) a response to Rachels Divine command theory (in LaFollette [ed.] The Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory) James Rachels God and human attitudes (Rel.Stud. 7, 1971; & in Helm) Eleonore Stump & Norman Kretzmann Being and goodness (in Divine & Human Action, ed. Thomas V. Morris) R. G. Swinburne The Coherence of Theism chapter 11 Duty and the will of god (Can.J.Phil. IV, 1974; & in Helm) Robert Young Theism and morality (Can.J.Phil. VII, 1977; & in Helm) Within the bounds of an essay which cannot thoroughly explore meta-ethical theories, discuss the effect on our attitude towards ethics (and towards religion) of the most attractive of the different possible answers to this question. Note the two parts of the question: can we and must we define morality in terms of religion? If the answer to the former is no, of course, the second is answered too. Religious Experience Nasrudin put on a Sufi robe and decided to make a pious journey. On his way he met a priest and a yogi, and they decided to team up together. When they got to a village the others asked him to seek donations while they carried out their devotions. Nasrudin collected some money and bought halwa with it. He suggested that they divide the food, but the others, who were not yet hungry enough, said that it should be postponed until night. They continued on their way; and when night fell [...] they decided to sleep. In the morning, the one who related the best dream should have the first choice of the halwa. In the morning the priest said: In my dreams I saw the founder of my religion, who made a sign of benediction, singling me out as especially blessed. The others were impressed, but the Yogi said: I dreamt that I visited Nirvana, and was utterly absorbed into nothing. They turned to the Mulla. I dreamt that I saw the Sufi teacher Khidr, who appears only to the most sanctified. He said: Nasrudin, eat the halwa now! And, of course, I had to obey. From The Pleasantries of the Incredible Mulla Nasrudin, Idries Shah Is there any reason why religious experience should be judged differently from other kinds of experience? William Alston Perceiving god (J.Phil. 83, 1986; & in Stump & Murray) Caroline Franks Davis The Evidential Force of Religious Belief A.C. Ewing Awareness of god (Philosophy 32, 1965; & in his Non-Linguistic Philosophy) John Hick Seeing-as and religious experience (in Philosophy of Religion: Proceedings of the 8th International Wittgenstein Symposium [1983], ed. Gombocz; & in Faith, ed. Penelhum) Alasdair MacIntyre Visions (in Flew & MacIntyre) George Mavrodes Revelation in Religious Belief Anthony O Hear Experience, Explanation, and Faith chapter 2 John J. Shepherd Experience, Inference, and God especially chapter 1 Richard Swinburne The Existence of God chapter 13 W.J. Wainwright Mysticism and sense perception (Rel.Stud. 9, 1973; & in Cahn & Shatz) Keith Ward Religion & Revelation Paul Williams Non-conceptuality, critical reasoning, and religious experience. Some Tibetan Buddhist discussions (Philosophy, Religion, and the Spiritual Life ed. Michael McGhee) Keith E. Yandell The Epistemology of Religious Experience Should we treat visions of the Virgin, etc., differently from Macbeth s vision of a dagger, or my vision of my computer screen? If we take religious experience out of the realm of ordinary experience, what realm do we put it in, and are we entitled to call it experience? And, perhaps most importantly, what should our attitude (as individuals or as a society) be to those who act upon claimed religious experiences that we don t share?

8 Miracles a) Could there ever be good grounds for believing in a miracle? b) Could the occurrence of miracles be used to prove the existence of god, or the claims of a particular religion? Robert M. Adams Miracles, laws of nature, and causation (PASS LXVI, 1992) John Beversluis C.S. Lewis and the Search for Rational Religion chapter 4. Contains a salutary discussion of Lewis s arguments against naturalism in Miracles (Fontana) J.A. Cover Miracles and (Christian) theism (in Stump & Murray) Paul J. Dietl On miracles (A.P.Q. 5, 1968; & in Donnelly) Antony Flew God and Philosophy chapter 7 Hume: Philosopher of Moral Science chapter 5 Hume s philosophy of religion (Philosophers Ancient and Modern ed. Godfrey Vesey) pp J.C.A. Gaskin Hume s Philosophy of Religion chapter 8 R.F. Holland The miraculous (A.P.Q. 2, 1965; & in Donnelly, & in Swinburne) Chris Hughes Miracles, laws of nature, and causation (PASS LXVI, 1992) David Hume Enquiry sections VII and XII give some of the philosophical background, section X and pp ( Additional Note to section X) is the central text. Section X ( Of Miracles ) is available as a separate volume, & is reprinted in Swinburne & in Stump & Murray Peter J. King Miracles (as a hand-out, or on the W-WW at: <URL: J.L. Mackie The Miracle of Theism chapter 1 (an extract from which is reprinted in Swinburne) P. Nowell-Smith Miracles (in Flew & MacIntyre) Douglas Odergard Miracles and good evidence (Rel.Stud. 18, 1982) Richard Swinburne The Existence of God chapter 12 Bernard Williams Hume on religion (in David Hume: A Symposium, ed. Pears) When reading Hume (a good text to start with), be careful to distinguish between his empirical argument (experience has shown us that there never have been good enough grounds for licensing belief in miracles) and his a priori argument (there could never be such grounds). Hume mentions neither one s own experience (is that more trustworthy than hearsay?) nor physical traces (e.g., the Turin shroud). Should he have? What difference would it have made, and how might he have defended his position against counter-arguments based on these? How might we define a miracle? Are instances of black magic miraculous? Are incredible coincidences miraculous? Would divine intervention within the laws of nature be miraculous? Religious Language There are, indeed, things that cannot be put into words. They make themselves manifest. They are what is mystical (WITTGENSTEIN, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.522). What, if anything, might this mean for questions concerning religion? A.C. Ewing Religious assertions in the light of contemporary philosophy (Philosophy 32, 1957; & in his Non-Linguistic Philosophy) P.M.S. Hacker Insight and Illusion chapter IX John Hick God and the Universe of Faiths papers 1 & 2 W.D. Hudson Some remarks on Wittgenstein s account of religious belief (Talk of God, Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures, Volume 2) Fergus Kerr Theology after Wittgenstein chapter 4 T. McPherson Positivism and religion (Philosophy & Phenomenological Research XIV, 1954; & in Flew & MacIntyre as Religion as the inexpressible ) D.Z. Phillips Religious beliefs and language games (Ratio 12, 1970; & in Mitchell) A.N. Prior Can religion be discussed? (Aust.J.Phil., 1942; & in Flew & MacIntyre) N.H.G. Robinson The logic of religious language (Talk of God, Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures, Vol.2) Arvind Sharma The Philosophy of Religion: A Buddhist Perspective chapter 6 Janet Soskice Metaphor and Religious Language Richard Swinburne The Coherence of Theism chapters 4 and 5 L. Wittgenstein Philosophical Investigations I, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus There is clearly a strong connection between this essay and the one on religious experience (and, to a certain extent, between this and all the preceding essays). Try to stick as far as possible to the central question of language, rather than allowing yourself to be pulled into other areas, no matter how interesting or important. I ve included some material on Wittgenstein and the Private Language argument (that s the readings from the Investigations). It s not really possible to approach this topic without some awareness and understanding of Wittgenstein, I think, but you ll need to decide whether to concentrate on him or simply to get what you need from what is said in the other readings. I ll discuss this more fully when we meet.

9 Faith, Knowledge, and Belief a) To believe only possibilities is not Faith, but mere Philosophy (SIR THOMAS BROWNE) Does it make sense to talk of a sphere of faith within and fortified against the realm of reason? b) When you believe in things you don t understand/then you suffer (STEVIE WONDER) Is it morally acceptable (or even possible) to believe in things you don t understand? S. Biderman Scriptures, revelation, and reason (in Philosophy East, Philosophy West, ed. Ben-Ami Scharfstein) I.M. Crombie The possibility of theological statements (in Faith and Logic, ed. Basil Mitchell; & in Mitchell) Antony Flew An Introduction to Western Philosophy chapter V J.C.A. Gaskin Hume s Philosophy of Religion chapter 6 John Hick Faith (Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edwards) Religious faith as experiencing-as (Talk of God, Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures, vol. 2; and in his God and the Universe of Faiths) J. Kellenberger Religious faith and Prometheus (Philosophy 55, 1980) C.B. Martin A religious way of knowing (Mind, 1952; & in Flew & MacIntyre) Alvin Plantinga & N. Wolterstorff [edd] Faith and Rationality A.N. Prior Can religion be discussed? (Aust.J.Phil., 1942; & in Flew & MacIntyre) Arvind Sharma The Philosophy of Religion: A Buddhist Perspective chapter 5 John J. Shepherd Experience, Inference, and God esp. chapters 1 & 9 Stanley Jeyaraja Tambiah Magic, science, religion, and the scope of rationality this is more of a source book than a philosophical work; still, if you re concerned with the definitions of science, magic, and religion, you should find it interesting (if not easy) Roger Trigg Rationality and Religion G.A. Wells Belief and Make-Believe passim This is, I m afraid, a particularly difficult topic, partly because it demands such a wide discussion of the nature of faith, of reason, and the justification of beliefs. Each of these is a vast area in its own right. For this reason, you might want to narrow the question down a little (not too much), spending more time on one of the three areas, though not ignoring the others. If you do this, make sure you declare your intentions at the beginning of the essay (and don t lose sight of the fact that we re primarily concerned with religion. Is it acceptable and honest to appeal to faith when the arguments have gone against you? The question isn t essentially concerned with religion, though that s clearly its major concern, especially for us. Any retreat to faith in the face of overwhelming argument demands the same consideration, and such behaviour isn t necessarily confined to religion (though we are inclined to see it as a religious trait so that, for example, political movements that appeal to something like faith are often described in religious terms). Be careful, though; accepting an unproved hypothesis for scientific purposes isn t a matter of faith. Although what faith is is a matter of debate, you must be clear as to what it isn t. God, Space, Time, & Eternity a) Your years neither go nor come, but our years pass and others come after them (AUGUSTINE). Is this conception of god coherent? b) Could a god who is outside time create the universe and bring about events within it? David Braine The Reality of Time and the Existence of God Paul Helm God and spacelessness (Philosophy 55, 1980; & in Cahn and Shatz) Anthony Kenny The God of the Philosophers III and VIII Martha Kneale Eternity and Sempiternity (P.A.S. LXIX, ; & in Marjorie Grene [ed.] Spinoza) Brian Leftow Time and Eternity Delmas Lewis Eternity again (I.J.Phil.Rel. 15, 1984) Quentin Smith A new typology of temporal and atemporal permanence (Noûs 23, 1989) a response to the Stump & Kretzmann paper Eternity Quentin Smith & L. Nathan Oaklander Time, Change, and Freedom dialogue 4 Richard Sorabji Time, Creation, and the Continuum Eleonore Stump & Norman Kretzmann Eternity (The Journal of Philosophy LXXVIII, 1981; & in Morris, & in Stump & Murray) Keith Ward Religion & Creation chapter 11 N. Wolterstorff God everlasting (in God and the Good, edd Clifton J. Orlbeke & Lewis B. Smedes; & in Cahn & Shatz) A vast topic, but one of the most interesting, I think. The general heading mentions space, though neither of the questions does. You ll find a number of references in the reading to the notion that god is spaceless (non-extended, without position), but these are generally intended to throw light on arguments about timelessness. There are quite a few different concepts which the term eternity is used to pick out; not all of them are easily referred to (and some that are, such as sempiternity, will probably involve unfamiliar terminology). It s always important to express yourself clearly, but the dangers here are especially acute it s all to easy to slip from one use of eternity to another.

10 The Immortality of the Soul a) The only intelligible belief in life after death would be belief in bodily resurrection. Discuss b) Is belief in reincarnation coherent? c) Does any theory of karma offer both a metaphysically and an ethically satisfying account? Roy Bhaskar From East to West passim (an unusual, not to say off-beat, account, linking notions such as karma with Bhaskar s critical realism) Antony Flew [ed.] Body, Mind, and Death especially the extracts from Ducasse, Hick, and Hume. Antony Flew & D.M. MacKinnon Death (in Flew & MacIntyre) J.C.A. Gaskin Hume s Philosophy of Religion chapter 9 Peter Geach God and the Soul chapters 1 & 2 Geshe Kelsang Gyatso Understanding the Mind contains some directly relevant material and much that s indirectly relevant John Hick Philosophy of Religion chapters 7 & 8 David Hume On the immortality of the soul Kenneth K. Inada Buddhist Naturalism and the Myth of Rebirth (I.J.Phil.Rel. 1, 1970) Grace M. Jantzen Do we need immortality? (Modern Theology 1:1, 1984; & in Loades & Rue) Y. Krishan Is Karma Evolutionary? (Journal of the Indian Council for Philosophical Research, 1988) Hywel Lewis Immortality and dualism (in Brown; a response to Shoemaker s paper in the same collection) Geddes MacGregor Images of Afterlife G.I. Mavrodes The life everlasting and the bodily criterion of identity (Noûs XI, 1977; & in Cahn & Shatz) N.A. Nikam The Immortality of the Soul (Mind 60, 1951) Terence Penelhum Religion and Rationality pp (also in Cahn & Shatz) Roy Perrett Death and Immortality Rebirth (Rel.Stud. 23, 1987) D.Z. Phillips Death and Immortality pp (also in Loades & Rue) Arvind Sharma The Philosophy of Religion: A Buddhist Perspective chaps 9 & 10 Sydney Shoemaker Immortality and dualism (in Brown) Michael Stoeber Personal Identity and Rebirth (Rel.Stud., 1990) John Wisdom Eternal life (in Talk of God, Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures, volume 2) Dean Zimmerman Materialism and survival (in Stump & Murray) Prayer a) Could miracles happen on demand? b) If god does not exist, is prayer no more than talking to oneself? Vincent Brummer What Do We Do When We Pray? Don Cupitt Taking Leave of God passim. Arguments for the retention of a notion of prayer within a non-realist account of religion. Thomas P. Flint Two accounts of providence (in Divine & Human Action, ed. Thomas V. Morris) Peter Geach God and the Soul chapter 7 Gerard J. Hughes The Nature of God chapter IV (esp. pp ) Terence Penelhum Religion and Rationality chapter 20 (also in Swinburne) D.Z. Phillips The Concept of Prayer Eleonore Stump Petitionary prayer (A.P.Q. 16, 1979; & in Swinburne, & in Stump & Murray) Stewart Sutherland The study of religion and religions (in The Study of Religion, Traditional and New Religion, edd Stewart Sutherland & Peter Clarke) This is (as can be seen from the limited reading list) a fairly new topic for me. The notion of prayer is extremely difficult in that there s great disagreement between theists as to what they re doing (or should be doing) when they pray. Different answers to this question come into conflict with various beliefs about the nature of god and the world. Does a belief in an afterlife commit one to any particular view about the nature of the self? Is eternal life the same as life everlasting?

11 Creationism & Biology a) When religion and science disagree, which should the believer believe? b) What is the relationship between creationism and science? E. Andrews, W. Gitt, & W. Ouweneel [edd] Concepts in Creationism N. Eldredge The Monkey Business: A Scientist Looks at Creationism Stephen Jay Gould Hens Teeth and Horses Toes chapter 19 David Hull & Michael Ruse [edd] The Philosophy of Biology Phillip Kitcher Abusing Science: The Case against Creationism Ernan McMullin Evolution and special creation (Zygon 28, 1993; & in Hull & Ruse) and see below for Plantinga s reply A. Montagu [ed.] Science and Creationism mostly fairly journalistic and polemical, but often entertaining H. Morris Scientific Creationism Science and the Bible H. Morris & J. Whitcomb The Genesis Flood Arthur Peacocke Welcoming the disguised friend Darwinism and divinity (in Ruse:1) Alvin Plantinga When faith and reason clash: evolution and the Bible (Christian Scholar s Review 21, 1991; & in Hull & Ruse) Science: Augustinian or Duhemian? (Faith & Philosophy 13, 1996; & in Hull & Ruse as Reply to McMullin ) James Rachels Created from Animals chapter 3 Michael Ruse Darwinism Defended Creation science: the ultimate fraud (in Cherfas [ed.], Darwin Up to Date, & in Ruse:1) [ed.] 1. But Is It Science? [ed.] 2. Philosophy of Biology Edward L. Schoen Religious Explanations chapters IV & VI J.J.C. Smart & J.J. Haldane Atheism & Theism Haldane: pp Roger Trigg Rationality and Religion chapter 4 There are three main theistic positions regarding when science and scripture contradict each other: first, scripture should always be reinterpreted; secondly, science should always be rejected; thirdly (the moderate position), sometimes scripture and sometimes science should be taken as giving the truth. There is only one atheistic position, obviously, given that atheists don t accept religious teachings whether or not they re contradicted by science. In question a., especially, you should avoid concentrating on the more simple-minded advocates of the two immoderate positions (such as Christian fundamentalists or Richard Dawkins), and try to get to grips with what genuine arguments, if any, are or could be offered for them. Plantinga is a good example of the moderate position, especially in the former of the two papers cited above.