DOCSLIB.ORG

An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion Michael J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85369-9 - An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion Michael J. Murray and Michael C. Rea Index More information Index Adams, Robert M., 239, 240–2, 243, 245, Christology 248, 249 three-part, 84 afterlife, see immortality two-part, 83–4 Alston, William, 108, 109 see also Incarnation Anselm, of Canterbury St., 8, 12–13 Commissurotomy, see Trinity, and and perfect-being theology, 8 commissurotomy Ontological Argument, 124–35 compatibilism, 54, 61 Apollinarianism, 81 Constitution Trinitarianism, see Trinity, Aquinas, Thomas St., 30, 61, 100, statue–lump analogy 238, 263 Cosmological Argument, 135–46 Arianism, 81 Kalam version, 143–6 Aristotle, 73 counterfactual, 53 aseity, see self-existence of freedom, 59, 60–1 Assumption, 84 power, 53–4 atemporality, 40; see also eternity see also Molinism; Ockhamism Athanasian Creed, 66 Craig, William Lane, 143, 145 atheism creation, 22–3, 26–33 arguments for, see God, arguments Cryptomnesia, 277 against the existence of evolutionary argument against, see Davis, Stephen, 76 Evolution Dawkins, Richard, 97, 221 Augustine, St., 61, 70 Dembski, William, 215–16 Descartes, Rene´, 17, 125–6, 263 basic belief, 108 Design Arguments, 146–55 Basil, St., 69 argument from analogy, 147–8 Bayle, Pierre, 252 inference to the best explanation Behe, Michael, 216–20 argument, 148–9 Bergmann, Michael, 110 fine-tuning argument, Boethius, 40, 41 150–5 Brower, Jeffrey, 66, 67 determinism, 54 divine command ethics, see ethics; Calvin, John, 61 divine commands Calvinism, see Providence Docetism, 81 Chalcedonian Creed, 80 Draper, Paul, 178–80 287 © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85369-9 - An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion Michael J. Murray and Michael C. Rea Index More information 288 Index dualism, 263–4, 265–6, 271–4 evolutionary argument against atheism, and St. Thomas Aquinas, 263 see evolution Cartesian dualism, 263 mind–body dualism, 263 faith property dualism, 262 and rationality, 103–11 substance dualism, 263 and properly basic belief, see properly basic belief Ebionism, 81 and religious experience, 110 Edwards, Jonathan, 61, 63 and religious pluralism, see religious Edwards, Paul, 272, 275, 277, 279, 281 pluralism eternalism and underdetermination, 101–3 and divine eternity, 44 characterized, 93, 94–103 defined, 36–7 fatalism versus presentism, 37–9 logical, 51–4 eternity, 40, 41–7 theological, 50–4 and agency, 45, 46 fideism, 93–4 and change, 43 foreknowledge and omniscience, 46–7 and freedom, 35, 49–54, 55–6; see also and perfect-being theology, 42–7 fatalism, theological and personality, 45–6 chessmaster analogy, 55, 57 and presentism versus eternalism simple foreknowledge theory of debate, 44 providence, see Providence ethics see also omniscience divine commands and, 246–9 four dimensionalism, 37 subjectivism and objectivism in, see also eternalism 228–32 freedom theological grounding for, 235–45 and divine foreknowledge, see Euthyphro Dilemma, see ethics, divine foreknowledge commands and and time travel, 52–3 everlastingness, 40 divine, 26–33 evidence, 98–100 see also compatibilism; counterfactual; and underdetermination, determinism; Ockhamism; see Underdetermination hard fact experiential, 99 forensic, 98 Geach, P. T., 72 propositional, 99, 105 God evidentialism, 104–7, 110–11 arguments for the existence of evil Cosmological Argument, 135–46; argument for atheism from, 158–80 see also Cosmological Arguments evolution Design Arguments, 146–55 and evolutionary psychology, 222–5 arguments from morality, 235–45 and intelligent design, 214 ontological argument, 124–35 and religious creation accounts, arguments against the existence of 209–12 the argument from evil, evolutionary argument against atheism, the argument from hiddenness, 180–8 119–22 concept of, 3–12 © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85369-9 - An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion Michael J. Murray and Michael C. Rea Index More information Index 289 creator, 22–3 Malebranche, Nicholas, 25 goodness of, 19, 26–33; see also Moral Martyr, Justin, 68 Unsurpassability materialism, 262, 264–6 necessity of, 14 Matrix, 79, 99, 267 see also freedom, divine; eternity; Menzel, Christopher, 14 omnipresence; omnipotence; Merricks, Trenton, 70–1, 285 omniscience; self-existence middle knowledge, 59–60 Gould, Stephen Jay, 197–9 see also Molinism Guanilo of Mormoutier, 126–8 miracles, 200–9 modalism, 67 hard fact, 54 Molina, Luis de, 58 Helander, Samuel, 276–7 Molinism, see Providence heresy, 65–6 see also counterfactual Hick, John, 177 Monophysitism, 81 Howard-Snyder, Daniel, 31–3, 76, 77, 79, 177 Monothelitism, 81, 84 Howard-Snyder, Frances, 31–3 moral unsurpassability, 26–33 Hume, David Morris, Thomas V., 9, 14, 70, 87–8 on immortality, 271–2 Moser, Paul, 187–8 on miracles, 200–9 Murphy, Bridey, 275–6 idealism, 263 Nazianzus, Gregory of, 69 immortality Nestorianism, 81 and mind–body dependence, 271–4 Nicene Creed, 258 arguments pro and con, 271–85 Nyssa, Gregory of, 69 theories of, 259–62 see also reincarnation; resurrection occasionalism, 25–6 incarnation, 75 Ockham, William of, 54 heresies, 81 Ockhamism, 54 kenosis, 85–7 omnibenevolence, see God, Lord–Liar–Lunatic argument, 75, 76–80 goodness of; moral philosophical problems, 81–3 unsurpassability two-minds view of, 87–90 omniscience, 47–54 Intelligent Design Theory, 214 definition of, 47–9 see also foreknowledge; Kant, Immanuel, 128–9, 243, 252–3 Providence karma, 244 omnipotence, 15–22 kenosis, see incarnation, kenosis omnipresence, 40, 44 Kent, Clark, see Superman Ontological Argument, 124–35 Kretzmann, Norman, 40, 41 Modal Version, 130–5 open theism, see Providence Latin Trinitarianism, see Trinity, original guilt, 63 Latin theory Orphism, 261 Leibniz, Gottfried, 30, 237 orthodoxy, 65–6 Lewis, C. S., 68, 75 Liar Paradox, 48–9 Pascal, Blaise, 75 Locke, John, 251–2 Perfect-Being Theology, 7–12 © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85369-9 - An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion Michael J. Murray and Michael C. Rea Index More information 290 Index personal identity, 266–70 evaluated, 114 psychological continuity criterion, see also religious pluralism; religious 268–9 skepticism same body criterion, 269–70 religious pluralism, 111–19 Plantinga, Alvin, 108, 109, 117, 120–2, 164 characterized, 112–13 Plato, 261 see also religious skepticism; religious Pojman, Louis, 95, 97 exclusivism political philosophy and religion religious skepticism, 112 religion in liberal democracy, 254 see also religious pluralism; religious religious toleration, 250–3 exclusivism Polkinghorne, John, 68–9 responsivism, see Providence polytheism, 67, 70 resurrection, 261–2, 264, 280–5 presentism and ‘‘body-snatching,’’ 284–5 and eternity, 44 cannibalism problem, 281–2 and grounding, 38–9 of Jesus, 280 and temporal passage, 38 reassembly view, 281–2 defined, 37 Rowe, William, 31–3, 165, 169 versus eternalism, 37–9 Russell, Bertrand, 123 properly basic belief, 108–9 Providence, 22–6, 54–63 Schellenberg, John L., 181–4 Calvinism, 61–3 self-existence, 12–15 Molinism, 58–61 shade, 261 Openism, 55–7 simple foreknowledge theory, see Open Theism, see Openism Providence Responsivism, 58 social trinitarianism, see Trinity, social Simple Foreknowledge Theory, see analogy Responsivism specious present, 41–2 psychological continuity, see personal Stevenson, Ian, 276–8 identity Stoics, 261 Pythagoras, 261, 274–5 Stump, Eleonore, 40, 41 Pythagoreans, 261 subordinationism, 67 Superman, 67, 72 Rawls, John, 254–6 Swinburne, Richard, 74–5 Rea, Michael, 66, 67, 97 Reid, Thomas, 100 temporal passage reincarnation, 261, 264, 274–9 and eternity, 42 and hypnosis, 275–6, 277 and presentism, 38 and the work of Ian Stevenson, see Tertullian, 93, 278 Stevenson, Ian theodicy, 170–8 objections, 278–9 timelessness, divine, see atemporality population problem, 278–9 Transporter Room, 282–3 relative identity, see relative sameness Trinity, 66 relative sameness, 71–3 and multiple personality disorder, 71 reliabilism, 104, 106–11 and commissurotomy, 70–1 religious exclusivism, 114 arguments for belief in, 73–5 characterized, 114 heresies, 67 © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85369-9 - An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion Michael J. Murray and Michael C. Rea Index More information Index 291 Latin theory, 70 underdetermination, 101 logical problem of, 66–73 popular analogies, 68–9 van Inwagen, Peter, 57, 72, 283–5 psychological analogy, 70 Voltaire, 281 social analogy, 69–70 statue–lump analogy, 71–3 Weithman, Paul, 256 threeness–oneness problem, see Trinity, Wells, H. G., 36 logical problem of Wright, N. T., 76 Twain, Mark, 96 Wykstra, Stephen, 167 two-minds view, see incarnation, two-minds view of zombie, 261 © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org.
Recommended publications
  • Philosophy of Religion (HSA020N247H) | University of Roehampton

    Philosophy of Religion (HSA020N247H) | University of Roehampton

    09/25/21 Philosophy of Religion (HSA020N247H) | University of Roehampton Philosophy of Religion (HSA020N247H) View Online (Module Validation) Philosophy of Religion How are we to approach the philosophy of religion? Is it more than the philosophy of God? and what, if anything, does it have to do with the various practical and moral issues which occupy us as human beings? We shall approach the subject in a manner which acknowledges the significance of these practical and methodological issues, and will consider questions such as the following. What is the relation between science and religion? Does it make sense to say that there is purpose in the natural world? How are we to understand the purpose of our human lives? What is the relation between spirituality and religion? Is God necessary for morality? What is religious experience? Is there anything problematic in the idea that we need to be saved? 121 items Key Texts (1 items) Philosophy of Religion: Towards a More Humane Approach - John Cottingham, 2014 Book | Essential Reading Topic 1: What is philosophy of religion? (7 items) See accompanying handouts for each lecture New models of religious understanding - 2018 Book | Essential Reading | The Introduction is helpful in this context. Philosophy of Religion: Towards a More Humane Approach - John Cottingham, 2014 Book | Essential Reading | ch 1, ‘Method’ Why Philosophy Matters for the Study of Religion--And Vice Versa - Thomas A. Lewis, 2017 Book | Essential Reading | Introduction and ch 1. What is philosophy of religion? - Charles Taliaferro, 2019 Book | Essential Reading | ch 1. 1/11 09/25/21 Philosophy of Religion (HSA020N247H) | University of Roehampton Prolegomena to a philosophy of religion - J.
  • Emergentism As an Option in the Philosophy of Religion: Between Materialist Atheism and Pantheism

    Emergentism As an Option in the Philosophy of Religion: Between Materialist Atheism and Pantheism

    SURI 7 (2) 2019: 1-22 Emergentism as an Option in the Philosophy of Religion: Between Materialist Atheism and Pantheism James Franklin University of New South Wales Abstract: Among worldviews, in addition to the options of materialist atheism, pantheism and personal theism, there exists a fourth, “local emergentism”. It holds that there are no gods, nor does the universe overall have divine aspects or any purpose. But locally, in our region of space and time, the properties of matter have given rise to entities which are completely different from matter in kind and to a degree god-like: consciousnesses with rational powers and intrinsic worth. The emergentist option is compared with the standard alternatives and the arguments for and against it are laid out. It is argued that, among options in the philosophy of religion, it involves the minimal reworking of the manifest image of common sense. Hence it deserves a place at the table in arguments as to the overall nature of the universe. Keywords: Emergence; pantheism; personal theism; naturalism; consciousness 1. INTRODUCTION The main options among world views are normally classifiable as either materialist atheism, pantheism (widely understood) or personal theism. According to materialist atheism, there exists nothing except the material universe as we ordinarily conceive it, and its properties are fully described by science (present or future). According to personal theism, there exists a separate entity (or entities) of a much higher form than those found in the 2019 Philosophical Association of the Philippines 2 Emergentism as an Option in the Philosophy of Religion material universe, a god or gods.
  • Justifying Religious Freedom: the Western Tradition

    Justifying Religious Freedom: the Western Tradition

    Justifying Religious Freedom: The Western Tradition E. Gregory Wallace* Table of Contents I. THESIS: REDISCOVERING THE RELIGIOUS JUSTIFICATIONS FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.......................................................... 488 II. THE ORIGINS OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN EARLY CHRISTIAN THOUGHT ................................................................................... 495 A. Early Christian Views on Religious Toleration and Freedom.............................................................................. 495 1. Early Christian Teaching on Church and State............. 496 2. Persecution in the Early Roman Empire....................... 499 3. Tertullian’s Call for Religious Freedom ....................... 502 B. Christianity and Religious Freedom in the Constantinian Empire ................................................................................ 504 C. The Rise of Intolerance in Christendom ............................. 510 1. The Beginnings of Christian Intolerance ...................... 510 2. The Causes of Christian Intolerance ............................. 512 D. Opposition to State Persecution in Early Christendom...... 516 E. Augustine’s Theory of Persecution..................................... 518 F. Church-State Boundaries in Early Christendom................ 526 G. Emerging Principles of Religious Freedom........................ 528 III. THE PRESERVATION OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN MEDIEVAL AND REFORMATION EUROPE...................................................... 530 A. Persecution and Opposition in the Medieval
  • On Religious Toleration: Prudence and Charity in Augustine, Aquinas

    On Religious Toleration: Prudence and Charity in Augustine, Aquinas

    ON RELIGIOUS TOLERATION: PRUDENCE AND CHARITY IN AUGUSTINE, AQUINAS, AND TOCQUEVILLE By MARY C. IMPARATO A dissertation submitted to the School of Graduate Studies Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in Political Science Written under the direction of P. Dennis Bathory And approved by _____________________________________ _____________________________________ _____________________________________ _____________________________________ New Brunswick, New Jersey October, 2020 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION On Religious Toleration: Prudence and Charity in Augustine, Aquinas, and Tocqueville By MARY C. IMPARATO Dissertation Director: P. Dennis Bathory This work seeks to explore the concept of religious toleration as it has been conceived by key thinkers at important junctures in the history of the West in the hopes of identifying some of the animating principles at work in societies confronted with religious difference and dissent. One can observe that, at a time when the political influence of the Catholic Church was ascendant and then in an era of Church hegemony, St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas respectively, faced with religious dissent, argue for toleration in some cases and coercion in others. While, from a contemporary liberal standpoint, one may be tempted to judge their positions to be opportunistic, harsh, or authoritarian, if we read them in the context of their social realities and operative values, we can better understand their stances as emanating ultimately from prudence (that virtue integrating truth and practice) and charity (the love of God and neighbor). With the shattering of Christian unity and the decoupling of throne and altar that occurs in the early modern period, the context for religious toleration is radically altered.
  • Religious Skepticism and Higher-Order Evidence Nathan King (Whitworth University)

    Religious Skepticism and Higher-Order Evidence Nathan King (Whitworth University)

    Religious Skepticism and Higher-Order Evidence Nathan King (Whitworth University) 1. Introduction The recent literature on the epistemology of disagreement has its roots in the literature on religious disagreement from the 1980’s and 90’s. This sort of development differs from what one might have expected—namely, a body of literature on the epistemology of disagreement in general, followed by application to specific cases (say, religious disagreement). In this instance, however, the discussion moved from specific to general. The specific, religious-oriented discussion started by (e.g.) William Alston, Gary Gutting, John Hick, Alvin Plantinga, and Peter van Inwagen gave rise to the general discussion taking place today between (e.g.) Michael Bergmann, David Christensen, Adam Elga, Richard Feldman, Thomas Kelly, and Jennifer Lackey. In this paper, I tie together some threads common to these two discussions, and consider to what extent the recent literature should impact the ongoing discussion of religious disagreement. As a means to this, I’ll examine two arguments for religious skepticism: (1) an argument from peer disagreement; and (2) a cumulative argument from higher-order evidence. I aim to show that the first argument is unsound, but that the second is more promising for the religious skeptic. I’ll close by discussing some strategies for replying to the second argument. The best of these replies, I’ll suggest, reveals ways in which discussions of disagreement and higher-order evidence point beyond themselves. 2. The Argument from Peer Disagreement Much recent discussion of the epistemology of disagreement has focused on the special case of disagreement between epistemic peers.
  • Atheism, Agnosticism, and Nonbelief

    Atheism, Agnosticism, and Nonbelief

    ATHEISM, AGNOSTICISM, AND NONBELIEF: A QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF TYPE AND NARRATIVE By Christopher Frank Silver Ralph W Hood Jr Jim Tucker Professor Professor (Co-Chair) (Co-Chair) Valerie C. Rutledge David Rausch Professor Assistant Professor (Committee Member) (Committee Member) Anthony J. Lease A. Jerald Ainsworth Dean of the College of Health, Education Dean of the Graduate School and Professional Studies ATHEISM, AGNOSTICISM, AND NONBELIEF: A QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF TYPE AND NARRATIVE By Christopher Frank Silver A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga Chattanooga, Tennessee August 2013 ii Copyright © 2013 By Christopher Frank Silver All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Extensive research has been conducted in exploration of the American religious landscape, however recently has social science research started to explore Nonbelief in any detail. Research on Nonbelief has been limited as most research focuses on the popularity of the religious “nones” or the complexities of alternative faith expressions such as spirituality. Research has been limited in exploring the complexity of Nonbelief or how non-believers would identify themselves. Most research assumes nonbelievers are a monolithic group with no variation such as Atheism or Agnosticism. Through two studies, one qualitative and one quantitative, this study explored identity of Nonbelief. Study one (the qualitative study) discovered that individuals have shared definitional agreement but use different words to describe the different types of Nonbelief. Moreover, social tension and life narrative play a role in shaping one’s ontological worldview.
  • The Origins of Religious Disbelief

    The Origins of Religious Disbelief

    Religious Disbelief 1 The Origins of Religious Disbelief Ara Norenzayan1 & Will M. Gervais2 1 Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 Canada 2 Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky, 201 Kastle Hall, Lexington, KY, 40506, USA Corresponding authors: Norenzayan, A. ([email protected]); Gervais, W. M. ([email protected]) Word count: Text: 2550; Abstract: 106 In press, Trends in Cognitive Sciences Religious Disbelief 2 Abstract Although most people are religious, there are hundreds of millions of religious disbelievers in the world. What is religious disbelief and how does it arise? Recent developments in the scientific study of religious beliefs and behaviors point to the conclusion that religious disbelief arises from multiple interacting pathways, traceable to cognitive, motivational, and cultural learning mechanisms. We identify four such pathways, leading to four distinct forms of atheism, which we term mindblind atheism, apatheism, inCREDulous atheism, and analytic atheism. Religious belief and disbelief share the same underlying pathways that can be explained within a single evolutionary framework that is grounded in both genetic and cultural evolution. Religious Disbelief 3 The Existence and Prevalence of Disbelief Most people on the planet are deeply religious. Nonetheless, there is considerable individual and population variability in both commitment to gods as well as in behaviors that support belief in them [1,2]. Moreover, religious beliefs fluctuate across situations [3], across the lifespan [4], and across historical periods [5]. The worldwide prevalence of atheists is nontrivial, numbering over half a billion or possibly more (see Box 1). Religious disbelief has not received adequate scientific attention, and poses an interesting puzzle to evolutionary explanations that see religious beliefs and behaviors as integral components of human nature [6,7].
  • Philosophy of Religion

    Philosophy of Religion

    International Journal for Philosophy of Religion Cumulative Index Volumes 1-38 (1970-1995) Compiled by NAYNA }IVAN and EUGENE THOMAS LONG With the assistance of PATAKIANTAL Part One: Articles Part Two: Review Articles Part Three: Book Reviews Kluwer Academic Publishers DORDRECHT / BOSTON / LONDON 184 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR PlllLOSOPHY OF RELIGION Part One: Articles Special issues 1970 (Volume 1, No.3) Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: Commemorating the 200th anniversary of his birth (27 August 1770) with contributions by Darrel E. Christensen, Murray Greene, Edgar H. Henderson, Robert 1. Perkins, Efraim Shmeli & Frederick G. Weiss 1988 (Volume 24, Nos. 1-2) The problem of evil with contributions by Keith Chrzan, David A. Conway, R. Z. Friedman, C. Robert Mesle, Bruce R. Reichenbach & Jane Mary Trau 1992 (Volume 31, Nos. 2-3) The epistemic status of religious belief guest-edited by Bowman 1. Clarke & William 1. Power with contributions by William P. Alston, Bowman L. Clarke, Frederick Ferre, Eugene Th. Long, William L. Power, Theodore Runyon & Keith E. Yandell 1995 (Volume 38, Nos. 1-3) God, reason and religions edited by Eugene Th. Long with contributions by William P. Alston, David B. Burrell, Bowman 1. Clarke, Eugene Th. Long, Robert Cummings Neville, Philip 1. Quinn, William 1. Rowe, Robert P. Scharlemann, John E. Smith, Richard Swinburne & Merold Westphal Articles on author's name in alphabetical/chronological order Adams, E. M. (1985) The accountability of religiOUS discourse, 18(1-2): 3-17. Alon, Ilai see Graves, David & Alon, Ilai (1995). Alston, William P. (1985) Divine foreknowledge and alternative conceptions of human freedom, 18(1-2): 19-32.
  • Religious Skepticism, Atheism, Humanism, Naturalism, Secularism, Rationalism, Irreligion, Agnosticism, and Related Perspectives)

    Religious Skepticism, Atheism, Humanism, Naturalism, Secularism, Rationalism, Irreligion, Agnosticism, and Related Perspectives)

    Unbelief (Religious Skepticism, Atheism, Humanism, Naturalism, Secularism, Rationalism, Irreligion, Agnosticism, and Related Perspectives) A Historical Bibliography Compiled by J. Gordon Melton ~ San Diego ~ San Diego State University ~ 2011 This bibliography presents primary and secondary sources in the history of unbelief in Western Europe and the United States, from the Enlightenment to the present. It is a living document which will grow and develop as more sources are located. If you see errors, or notice that important items are missing, please notify the author, Dr. J. Gordon Melton at [email protected]. Please credit San Diego State University, Department of Religious Studies in publications. Copyright San Diego State University. ****************************************************************************** Table of Contents Introduction General Sources European Beginnings A. The Sixteenth-Century Challenges to Trinitarianism a. Michael Servetus b. Socinianism and the Polish Brethren B. The Unitarian Tradition a. Ferenc (Francis) David C. The Enlightenment and Rise of Deism in Modern Europe France A. French Enlightenment a. Pierre Bayle (1647-1706) b. Jean Meslier (1664-1729) c. Paul-Henri Thiry, Baron d'Holbach (1723-1789) d. Voltaire (Francois-Marie d'Arouet) (1694-1778) e. Jacques-André Naigeon (1738-1810) f. Denis Diderot (1713-1784) g. Marquis de Montesquieu (1689-1755) h. Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) B. France and Unbelief in the Nineteenth Century a. August Comte (1798-1857) and the Religion of Positivism C. France and Unbelief in the Twentieth Century a. French Existentialism b. Albert Camus (1913 -1960) c. Franz Kafka (1883-1924) United Kingdom A. Deist Beginnings, Flowering, and Beyond a. Edward Herbert, Baron of Cherbury (1583-1648) b.
  • Emily Dickinson: Mystic and Skeptic

    Emily Dickinson: Mystic and Skeptic

    EMILY DICKINSON: MYSTIC AND SKEPTIC By ROBERT GENE FLICK A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PABTIAL FULFILLMENT OF HIE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY' OF FLORIDA April, 1967 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To the administration and trustees of Jacksonville University I wish to express sincere thanUs for the paid leave of absence that allowed me to complete this dissertation. For their interest and support of my efforts to obtain such a grant, I am especially grateful to Dr. Dan A. Thomas, Dean of the Faculty, Dr. John E. Tilford, Chairman of the Divi- sion of Humanities, and Dr. George W. Hallam, Professor of English and a long-time friend. I want to thank those members of the English Department at the Uni- versity of Florida v^o have shown interest in my progress and have offered advice and encouragement over a period of several years. I should like to mention particularly Professors T. Walter Herbert, Edwin C. Kirkland, Peter Lisca, and Alton C. Morris. My principal debt of gratitude, for his kindness, patience, and wise counsel, must go to the chairman of my committee. Dr. John T. Fain, who has given generously of his time in going over my writing and guiding me in the various stages of this study. I am Indebted also to Dr. William Ruff, a considerate and helpful member of my committee for several years, and to the people who at various times have represented my minor in humanities: Dr. John H. Groth, an inspiring former teacher, and Dr.
  • The Transcendental and the Transcendent

    The Transcendental and the Transcendent

    1 The Transcendental and the Transcendent SAMI PIHLSTRÖM Department of Philosophy, University of Helsinki, Finland E-mail: [email protected] 1. Introduction: the Kantian background It is, as is well known, a feature of utmost importance to Immanuel Kant’s transcendental philosophy that the concepts of the transcendental and of the transcendent are strictly kept separate. 1 The latter refers to something that lies beyond human experience and knowledge (such as things in themselves, or the unknowable objects of the “ideas of pure reason” critically analyzed in Kant’s Transcendental Dialectic, i.e., the soul, freedom, and God), whereas the former denotes the limits and/or conditions of experience and knowledge, particularly the necessary conditions for the possibility of cognitive experience that Kant examines in his Transcendental Aesthetic (i.e., space and time as Anschauungsformen ) and Transcendental Analytic (i.e., the pure concepts of understanding, or the categories). 2 One of Kant’s most emphatic formulations of the distinction is the following: Wir wollen die Grundsätze, deren Anwendung sich ganz und gar in den Schranken möglicher Erfahrung hält, immanente , diejenigen aber, welche diese Grenzen überfliegen sollen, transzendente Grundsätze nennen. Ich verstehe unter diesen nicht den transzendentalen Gebrauch oder Missbrauch der Kategorien, welcher ein blosser Fehler der nicht gehörig durch Kritik gezügelten Urteilskraft ist, die auf die Grenze des Bodens, worauf allein dem reine Verstande sein Spiel erlaubt ist, nicht genug achthat; sondern wirkliche Grundsätze, die uns zumuten, alle jene 2 Grenzpfähle niederzureissen und sich einen ganz neuen Boden, der überall keine Demarkation erkennt, anzumassen. Daher sind transzendental und transzendent nicht einerlei.
  • Through Humility the Path to Godliness Ascends on High”: St

    Through Humility the Path to Godliness Ascends on High”: St

    THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA “Through Humility The Path to Godliness Ascends on High”: St. Augustine’s Challenge to Modern Thought on Humility and Greatness A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Theology and Religious Studies Of The Catholic University of America In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Doctor of Philosophy © Copyright All Rights Reserved By Joseph John McInerney Washington, D.C. 2012 “Through Humility the Path to Godliness Ascends on High”: St. Augustine’s Challenge to Modern thought on Humility and Greatness Joseph John McInerney, Ph.D. Director: Joseph E. Capizzi, Ph.D. “Everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted” (Lk 14:11). Few thinkers in the Christian tradition place greater emphasis on this Gospel principle than Augustine of Hippo. Augustine asserts that humility is the key to one’s salvation and is the foundation of a person’s greatness. Humility plays no such role, however, in the thought of classical or modern philosophers. The moral theories of Aristotle, Plotinus, Hume, and Nietzsche espouse little relation between humility and moral excellence or propose a view of that relationship in which humility is opposed to greatness. The purpose of this study is to detail the moral principles various thinkers use to approach the ideas of humility and greatness, thus demonstrating the manner in which each author comes to a particular conclusion regarding the relationship between the two principles. The focus of the study will be upon Augustine’s conception of humility and greatness, as his understanding is unique in the positive value it attributes to humility in its relation to human excellence.