Philosophy of Religion

Is the claim that God exists true or not? How do I know if it’s true? Why not? Since the first time we were capable of asking them, they have been perplexed. The branch of philosophy that concerns itself with what we can know is called epistemology, and it can be used to explore the questions of divine existence. It’s not like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it Hide the full description.

Professor James Hall is the Chair of the Department of Philosophy at the University of Virginia. The son of a Baptist minister who later became a university professor, Professor Hall first trained at a seminary before taking his doctorate in philosophy and embarking on a teaching career nearly 40 years ago.

This is not a course with a hidden agenda, or an exercise in polemic, as he announces early in the series where he stands on these issues. We will not let the cat out of the bag. The story of Professor Hall’s own background and journey, which he shares with you in Lecture 3, is far too interesting for us to reveal.

Professor Hall is described in AudioFile magazine as amiable, humorous, clear, and interesting.

This is a rigorous course in the most positive sense of the word. In every lecture you use it, it’s one of the great joys of intellect.

This course is engaging because of Professor Hall’s ability to avoid the hazard of philosophy being unnecessarily abstract. He uses a memorable antacid commercial to illustrate the loss of relevance in a non sequitur argument and a classic Garry Trudeau cartoon to illustrate equivocation in language.

Tools and terms have clarity.

The course begins with the first eight lectures. You understand the terms philosophy, religion, god, and knowledge.

What do we mean when we say God?

Professor Hall narrows the definition of God to the God of ethical monotheism: the God of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. There is only one God deserving of worship. Each characteristic of the God of ethical monotheism is put into place one by one.

There are no limits to God’s powers.

There are no limits to God’s knowledge.

There are no limits to distance or separation that affect God.

God must not have a moral flaw.

Being, itself, the limit of everything else is what God is not limited by.

There are arguments for God’s existence.

The major arguments for the existence of God are explored in the course.

The argument is on thetological. The very concept of Godhood is what St. Anselm and René Descartes said about divine existence.

The logic of the argument. The existence of the world proves the existence of God, without a first cause for all of being, according to this argument.

Get it immediately. The philosophy of religion.

There is a teleological argument. The magnificent design of the world implies the existence of a designer according to the argument articulated by the psalmist, St. Paul, and William Paley. If we find a clock on the beach, we assume it was created by a clockmaker.

There is a divine encounter. Some people are said to have had direct communication with God. The other arguments are a waste of time because we would have direct evidence of God if their reports are true.

A Scottish verdict is not proved after the review and testing of these four arguments.

There are arguments against God’s existence.

Professor Hall reversed the burden of proof and asked, Can humans know that God does not exist?

You study the argument that God can’t exist because of evil humans.

You learn that the major religious traditions have marshaled.

The world is perfect and there is no problem of evil. It’s not like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it The absence of good is what makes evil. It’s not like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it Apparent evil exists to serve a larger good because God’s purposes are inscrutable to us. It’s not like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it It is necessary for evil done by humans to be a consequence of free will and God’s will. There is no opportunity for virtue if there is no opportunity for evil. An associated argument is that demonic forces cause evil because of their freedom. God is not the cause of evil. It’s not like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it Those who suffer are punished or elevated because of it.

The course also invites a hung jury. Atheism is not an obvious candidate for knowledge.

There is a tipping over the chessboard.

You study approaches that don’t have proof of God.

There are two lectures about faith without evidence. The consequences of the argument that proof is irrelevant to faith and the argument that the demand for proof is a barrier to faith are examined. It’s not like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it The consequences of the argument about God being beyond the world and everything in it are explored.

There are causes and intentions in playing a different game.

In general, logical and empirical explanations look for causes and effects. Acaused effect is not free to happen and does not havemotives or intentions.

Religion is concerned with intentions as an explanation of life and the world.

You look at two other approaches to understanding religious claims.

There are things called paradigms. Three lectures examine religious claims and stories as part of a form of life operating under an alternative paradigm that includes intentionality as one of its basic categories of description and explanation. It’s not like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it’s like it Language games. Four lectures examine religious claims and stories as moves in language games, especially a game that consists of stories-told-for-a-purpose. These are stories that are not to be assessed as true or false, but as functional or dysfunctional, in terms of their life impact.

In the last lecture, you retrace the conceptual problems in ethical monotheism that urged its philosophical examination in the first place and the discoveries along the way that have led to defining it as we have. The last point is an invitation to all who have worked through this series to carry on the reflection themselves.