Philosophy of Religion
(PHIL 201)
Embedded Files
Course Description | Course Schedule
Study Helps & Philosophy Links
Zoom
Spring 2021
9:10-10:10 MWF
Email: fritzman@lclark.edu
Class Email: 21sp-phil-201-f1@lclark.edu
Office Hours: 10:30-11:30 & 1:00-3:00 MWF, and by appointment
COURSE DESCRIPTION
Friedrich Hölderlin: "Only those who are themselves godlike believe in the gods."
Thomas Jefferson: "We shall have our follies without doubt. Some one or more of them will always be afloat. But ours shall be the follies of enthusiasm, not of bigotry.... Bigotry is the disease of ignorance, of morbid minds; enthusiasm of the free and buoyant. Education and free discussion are the antidotes of both.... I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past."
Peter Schjeldahl: "God creeps in. Human minds are the universe's only instruments for reflecting on itself. The fact of our existence suggests a cosmic approval of it. (Do we behave badly? We are gifted with the capacity to think so.) We may be accidents of matter and energy, but we can't help circling back to the sense of a meaning that is unaccountable by the application of what we know. If God is a human invention, good for us! We had to come up with something."
Oscar Wilde: "Religion is like a blind man looking in a black room for a black cat that isn't there, and finding it."
This is an introductory course in philosophy of religion. There is one required text:
Readings in the Philosophy of Religion: East Meets West
Edited by Andrew Eshleman
Wiley-Blackwell, 2008
ISBN-10: 1405147172
ISBN-13: 978-1405147170
Readings in the Philosophy of Religion is available through the College Bookstore, Amazon.com, or Barnes & Noble
Download a free copy of Microsoft's Office 365 Education— which includes Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote, and Teams—at https://products.office.com/en-us/student/office-in-education.
All material must be submitted as a .docx file. Other file formats, such as PDFs, Google docs, and .pages, are not acceptable.
During class sessions, you must always have your camera and audio turned on.
In this course, we will examine the various concepts of God (or of the gods) that philosophers from different cultural, historical, and religious traditions have articulated, and the reasons those philosophers have offered to support their articulations.
You will engage meaningfully with, and demonstrate knowledge about, a region or regions of the world other than the United States of America (through reading, writing, conversation, presentation and/or first-hand experiences). Topics of study include historical experience, cultural traditions, past and current social and economic realities, or transnational issues.
There are also learning outcomes for students who major in Philosophy.
In preparation for each class meeting, you should have read the assigned material. You should arrive in class with prepared questions or comments about something in the assigned reading.
A major goal of this course is to cultivate intellectual abilities which have general application. This course aims to provide the resources which will enable you to develop intellectual survival skills, question what passes as common knowledge and accepted wisdom, evaluate your own and others' positions, and formulate new ideas. Such skills consist in the ability to summarize the assigned material, and to write pieces in which ideas and arguments are articulated, criticized, defended. Such skills also involve developing the ability to think critically about the views of ourselves and others. Critical thinking consists in understanding several sides of a debate, and seeing both the advantages and limitations of an opinion. Learning to question your opinions is as crucial as arguing for them. If you only learn to give reasons for opinions already held, you merely are giving rationalizations for prejudices. You need to learn to think for yourself, developing, defending, and criticizing your beliefs.
In this connection, I am especially concerned that you develop the ability to discuss issues cogently and to write intelligent, reflective pieces in clear, grammatical English. It is important that you learn to think, in a disciplined way, about the books and issues they raise. Part of that discipline consists in being able to analyze, evaluate, and formulate arguments. This involves knowing how to identify basic assumptions, develop a line of reasoning, recognize the steps that lead to a conclusion, and determine whether an argument is sound. In this way, hopefully, you will develop intellectual curiosity and the competencies to reason logically, evaluate critically, communicate effectively, imagine creatively, and appreciate aesthetic and creative expressions of humanity.
You are encouraged to share your questions and observations with the rest of the class, and to engage critically with the material, myself, and each other. By participating in class discussions, you will encounter directly differing interpretations of the material, become aware of the history of these views, and be encouraged to develop your own critical perspectives. In interacting with the material and each other, you will acquire a knowledge and appreciation of self, society, human cultures, and the natural world. I intend that you discover what has been written and said concerning, in the words of Socrates, "the most important things"—questions about human character and the conduct of life. Such skills will enable you to succeed in subsequent courses and in endeavors outside of the classroom. Those abilities also will contribute to your development as educated citizens in a democratic society.
Each student will present in class one assessment on a specific reading assignment. There also will be one argumentative research paper (which includes a prospectus, two drafts, and a mandatory rewrite). And a class presentation of the argumentative research paper on the Final Exam Day.
Class participation and attendance will count for 10% of your final grade. The prospectus will count for 5%, the first draft for 10%, the second draft for 15%, the assessment for 20%, and the argumentative research paper for 35%, and the presentation for 5% of your final grade.
In order to receive credit for the assessment, drafts, and the argumentative paper, each must be a significant revision, responding to my suggestions and comments on the previous one.
The grading scale is as follows:
A = 93%-100%
A- = 90%-92%
B+ = 86%-89%
B = 83% 85%
B- = 80%-82%
C+ = 76%-79%
C = 73%-75%
C- = 70%-72%
D+ = 66%-69%
D = 60%-65%
F = 0%-59%.
An assessment should be approximately 2000 words, typed, double-spaced. You will sign up for a dates on which you will present your assessments. On the day you present, you will distribute copies to all of the persons in this class. This will require, of course, that you have enough copies made so that each member of the class has one. You first will read your assessment; then, you and I will serve as the main resource persons for fielding questions concerning the material. Since the class discussion will be centered around the assessment, it is crucial that you distribute the assessment the class session when you present it, and that you actually be in class to read your assessment.
An assessment is not a summary of the reading. Rather, its primary purpose assessment is to summarize, consolidate, and explicate the central issues, main points, and key motifs of the assigned reading in order to facilitate class discussion of the material. It is important that the assessment contextualize the reading by describing briefly both how the reading is a continuation and development of material which has come before, and how it contributes to the overall trajectory of the thinker's thought.
It is crucial that you critically engage the reading. You might argue that a claim that the author makes is incorrect, for example, or that a criticism in the secondary literature is incorrect. Alternatively, you might argue that an interpretation advanced in the secondary literature is incorrect. The assessment must reflect an acquaintance with the requisite secondary literature. This means that you must incorporate at least three secondary sources you consulted while writing your assessment.
The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy will be useful.
The Philosopher's Index will be vital for the Assessment and Argumentative Research Paper.
The Chicago Manual of Style's Citation Quick Guide is online.
There will be an argumentative research paper, 2000 words, typed, double-spaced. It will be on the same topic as your assessment.
You're welcome to consult the Writing Center, located on the main floor of Watzek Library.
Also useful is the Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue University.
If you would find it useful to create concept maps, to help write your assessment or argumentative research papers, you can download the software to create them from IHMC Cmap Tools.
All work must be submitted when it is due. Late work will not be accepted and will receive no credit.
This class will be successful only if there is a high degree of participation and attendance, and so I want you in class participating. The final grade for the course will be lowered by a full-letter grade if you miss four class sessions, the final grade will be lowered by two full-letter grades if you miss five class sessions, and you will be withdrawn from the course if you miss six or more class sessions. I will not accept make-up work unless you can document the reason for your absence. Documenting the reason for your absence means providing a note from, for example, your doctor explaining why you were absent. Serious illnesses and emergencies will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
Throughout the course you are expected to read carefully the assigned material. It is impossible to do well in this course without reading and studying the books. You should spend a minimum of three hours preparing for each class session. Read the assigned material at least twice and take notes on what you read. You are expected to attend all class sessions, come to class having read thoroughly the assigned material, and to contribute to the discussions.
Gorgias of Leontini maintained that "those who neglect philosophy and spend their time on ordinary studies are like the suitors who desired Penelope but slept with her maids." In philosophy, unlike ordinary studies, there are few right and wrong answers. There are better and worse arguments and ideas, however, usually in direct proportion to thoughtfulness and care. What is important is that you think for yourself, and that you develop and defend your own ideas. It would be an excellent idea to write drafts or outlines of your papers, and to have a comrade read them to check on spelling, grammar, development of arguments, and so forth.
You are strongly encouraged to discuss the class material, your ideas, your puzzles and difficulties with each other. A word to the wise: Find a study partner to discuss things with outside of class. (To see why this is effective for creativity and learning, read Malcolm Gladwell's article, Group Think: What Does "Saturday Night Live" Have in Common with German Philosophy?, The New Yorker, 2 December 2002, pages 102-107).
There's a Bollwood tune for every occasion. Click here.
When it comes to writing, though, do your own. That is the only way you will get the full benefit of your own efforts. I will be happy to discuss ideas with you, read outlines and rough drafts, and so forth. That is partly why I keep office hours.
A final word to the wise. It is not difficult to do well in this class. But it also is easy to do badly. Let me talk about the bad stuff first. You will receive a major grade reduction—or fail this course—if you do not read the material, seldom participate in class discussions, do not write your assessment or argumentative research paper, plagiarize, cheat, and so forth.
About plagiarizing and cheating. All students are expected to follow Lewis & Clark College's Academic Integrity Policy. Plagiarizers and cheaters will be given an "F" for the entire course (they will not be allowed to drop or withdraw from the course). I also will turn their cases over to the Honor Board; I will recommend that disciplinary penalties be assessed. It is never in your interest to plagiarize or cheat!
Now for the good stuff. With a concerted effort, you will do well in this class. To do well, you must participate in class discussions, read and study the assigned material, write the assessment and argumentative research paper, be in class (almost) all of the time, etc. I do not grade on a curve, and so there is no good reason why you should not get an "A" for the course!
The Writing Center is available for remote consultations on Zoom all semester. There are two ways to work with the Center:
Drop in Peer Tutoring. Tutoring hours will be 3:00-10:00 PM on Sundays-Thursdays. No appointment is needed—just sign in through the website and you can usually see a tutor right away.
Appointments with the Director. You can book consultation appointments with John Holzwarth throughout the semester. Appointments are often available on short notice.
Course policy on disability accommodation. If you have a disability or learning difference that may impact your academic performance, you may request accommodations by submitting documentation to Student Support Services. They will notify me of the accommodations for which you are eligible.
COURSE SCHEDULE
As a high-school student, when I asked my Sanskrit teacher whether it would be permissible to say that the divine Krishna got away with an incomplete and unconvincing argument, he replied: "Maybe you could say that, but you must say it with adequate respect."
—Amartya Sen, The Argumentative Indian:
Writings on Indian History, Culture
and Identity, (New York: Picador,
2005), page 5.
Week 1
Wednesday, January 20:
Read:
Malcolm Gladwell's "Group Think" in the New Yorker.
Ethan Watters, "We Aren't the World", Pacific Standard.
Joseph Henrich, Steven J. Heine, and Ara Norenzayan, "The Weirdest People in the World?", Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Volume 33:2-3, June 2010, pages 61-83.
Friday, January 22:
Andrew Eshleman, "What is Philosophy of Religion?", 1-10.
Discussion of research.
Sign-up for an Assessment by Monday. Email me if you prefer a specific date, otherwise I'll assign one to you.
Characterizing Ultimate Sacred Reality
Week 2
Monday, January 25:
Michael Peterson, William Hasker, Bruce Reichenbach, and David Basinger, " The Divine Attributes: What is God Like?", 21-30.
Sign-up for Assessments.
Discussion of (annotated) bibliography, reasons for citations, proper quoting (block or in-line).
Wednesday, January 27:
Rosemary Radford Ruether, "The Female Nature of God: A Problem in Contemporary Religious Life", 31-35.
Discussion on using the Arts & Humanities Citation Index and the Philosopher's Index.
Friday, January 29:
John B. Cobb, Jr and David Ray Griffin, "God as Creative-Responsive Love", 36-42.
Exercise for Monday: Find two articles (or one book and one article) that will be relevant to your Assessment. Provide one block quote and one in-line quote. List the articles (or the book and the article) in proper format for bibliography. Submit this in a .docx file, attached to an email.
Week 3
Monday, February 1:
Sushanta Sen, "The Vedic-Upanisadic Concept of Brahman (The Highest God)", 43-51.
Discussion of search procedures for articles and books.
Wednesday, February 3:
Christopher Ives, "Emptiness in Mahayana Buddhism", 52-58.
Discussion of search procedures for articles and books.
Friday, February 5:
Chung-Ying Cheng, "Reality and Divinity in Chinese Philosophy", 59-66.
Exercise for Monday: Submit a 1-3 page Prospectus of your Argumentative Research Paper in which you:
(1) indicate your topic and thesis.
(2) describe the problem or issue to be treated.
(3) outline your anticipated procedure and probable conclusion.
(4) include an annotated bibliography of works to be consulted (a minimum of six books or articles, with at least a paragraph discussing the relevance of each work to your project).
Week 4
Monday, February 8:
Due: Prospectus.
Wednesday, February 10:
Anselm of Canterbury, "How the Supreme Nature Exists through Itself", 67-68.
Friday, February 12:
Avicenna (Ibn Sina), "Of the Unicity of God", 69.
Week 5
Monday, February 15:
Thomas Aquinas, "The Omnipotence of God", 70-71.
Wednesday, February 17:
Thomas Aquinas, "Thinking and Speaking about God by Analogy", 72-73.
Friday, February 19:
Shankara (Samkara), "Everything Has Its Self in Brahman", 74-75.
Week 6
Monday, February 22:
Nagarjuna, "An Analysis of Nirvāṇa", 76-77.
Assessment: Malia Hunter.
Wednesday, February 24:
Zhou Dunyi (Zhou Lianxi), "Non-Polar and Yet Supreme Polarity!", 78-79.
Assessment: Olivia Spagnuolo.
Friday, February 26:
Vacation Day.
The Role and Limits of Reason in Supporting
Belief in an Ultimate Sacred Reality
Week 7
Monday, March 1:
Richard Taylor, "A Cosmological Argument for God’s Existence", 91-96.
Assessment: Dominic Monozon and Ben Welker.
Wednesday, March 3:
William Lane Craig, "al-Ghāzāli and the Kalām Cosmological Argument", 97-101.
Assessment: Elijah J. Sage and Sequoia Snogren-Mcginnis.
Friday, March 5:
J. L. Mackie, "Cosmological Arguments", 102-106.
Assessment: Cami Figueroa and Vic Netessine.
Week 8
Monday, March 8:
Richard Swinburne, "How the Existence of God Explains the World and Its Order", 107-112.
Assessment: Meghan Blandon.
Wednesday, March 10:
Robin Le Poidevin, "Are We the Outcome of Chance or Design?", 113-120.
Assessment: Nate Peterson and Emily Wagner.
Friday, March 12:
Ramakrishna Puligandla, "The Message of the Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad: A Phenomenological Analysis of Mind and Consciousness", 121-125.
Assessment: Torrey Lind and Mo Pollard.
Due Monday: First Draft of your Argumentative Research Paper.
Week 9
Monday, March 15:
Due: First Draft of your Argumentative Research Paper.
Wednesday, March 17:
Karen L. Carr and Philip J. Ivanhoe, "Antirationalism in Zhuangzi and Kierkegaard", 126-140.
Assessment: Evan Eldridge.
Friday, March 19:
Søren Kierkegaard, "Truth is Subjectivity", 151-154.
Assessment: Sophie Stringer.
Week 10
Monday, March 22:
Vacation Day.
Making Sense of Conflicting
Religious Truth Claims
Wednesday, March 24:
John Hick, "A Religious Understanding of Religion: A Model of the Relationship between Traditions", 364-373.
Assessment: Rebecca McCullough and Eleanor Stokes-Liss.
Friday, March 26:
Jerome Gellman, "In Defence of a Contented Religious Exclusivism", 374-382.
Assessment: Tyler Gannon and Brett Sterrer.
Week 11
Monday, March 29:
Brian Hebblethwaite, "John Hick and the Question of Truth in Religion", 383-389.
Assessment: Amanda Follansbee and Zakaria F. Kassim.
Wednesday, March 31:
John B. Cobb, Jr, "A Process Approach to Pluralism", 390-394.
Assessment: Chirayu Shah.
Friday, April 2:
Masao Abe, "A Dynamic Unity in Religious Pluralism: A Proposal from the Buddhist Point of View", 395-404.
Assessment: Cole Nakashima.
Due on Monday: Second Draft of the Argumentative Research Paper.
Week 12
Monday, April 5:
Due: Second Draft of the Argumentative Research Paper.
Wednesday, April 7:
Pacific APA.
Friday, April 9:
The Festival of Scholars and Artists.
The Festival of Scholars and Artists is a campus-wide celebration of student work. It is an opportunity to discuss research, to exhibit, perform, appreciate art, and cross disciplinary boundaries. Although classes are cancelled, you are required to participate in the Festival, either by presenting your work or attending presentations.
Questioning the Foundations of Inquiry
and Mapping New Territory
Week 13
Monday, April 12:
Don Cupitt, "Anti-Realist Faith", 413-419.
Assessment: Spencer Koonce.
Wednesday, April 14:
Paul Badham, "The Religious Necessity of Realism", 420-425.
Assessment: Brenden Patrick.
Friday, April 16:
Merold Westphal, "Postmodernism and Religious Reflection", 426-433.
Assessment: Andrew Sheiman.
Week 14
Monday, April 19:
Robert Kane, "The Ends of Metaphysics", 434-445.
Assessment: Clementine Gunter.
Wednesday, April 21:
Sarah Coakley, "Feminism and Analytic Philosophy of Religion", 446-464.
Assessment: Isabel Higgins and Anola Stacy.
Friday, April 23:
Michael E. Zimmerman, "Heidegger and Buddhism", 465-478.
Assessment: Sofia Benavides.
Week 15
Monday, April 26:
Roger T. Ames, "Li and the A-theistic Religiousness of Classical Confucianism," 479-488.
Assessment: Azazyel Jones.
Wednesday, April 28:
Concluding discussion.
Friday, April 30:
Reading Day.
Week 16
Thursday, May 6, 8:30 AM:
Due: Argumentative Research Papers.
Presentation of Argumentative Research Paper.
Home
J. M. Fritzman
0615 SW Palatine Hill Road
Portland, OR 97219-7899
USA
Report abuse