The Scottish Common Sense School of philosophy emerged during the Scottish Enlightenment of the second half of the eighteenth century. The School’s principal proponents were Thomas Reid, James Oswald, James Beattie and Dugald Stewart. They believed that we are all naturally implanted with an array of common sense intuitions and these intuitions are in fact the foundation of truth. Their approach dominated philosophical thought in Great Britain and the United States until the mid nineteenth century. In recent years (...) philosophers have renewed their appreciation of the notion of common sense. In particular, discussions of common sense intuitions are integral to contemporary epistemological foundationalism. Scottish Common Sense Philosophy: Sources and Origins is a 5-volume collection of writings by and about philosophers in the eighteenth-century Scottish Common Sense School. The writings by Thomas Reid and Dugald Stewart are readily available in recent editions and facsimile reprints so this series focuses on less accessible and less well-known items. Oswald’s Appeal appears here in print for the first time in any form since 1772. Volume 2 is the first reset printing of Beattie’s Essay in over 100 years, and is the only edition to contain annotations that trace the major changes that he made to the text. Almost all of the responses in volumes 3 and 4 appear here in print for the first time since their original publication. These include reviews, pamphlets and excerpts from books. Also included is previously unpublished discussion of Beattie’s Essay by Dugald Stewart. The final volume is a bibliography of around 80 Scottish philosophers from the early eighteenth century to the close of the nineteenth century. Unlike the 1932 bibliography of Scottish philosophers offered by T. E. Jessop, which selectively presents only the philosophical writings by the various Scottish philosophers, this volume attempts to catalogue all of the writings by these philosophers in all of their editions. (shrink)

Meaning, Understanding, and Practice is a selection of the most notable essays of an eminent contemporary philosopher on a set of central topics in analytic philosophy. Barry Stroud offers penetrating studies of meaning, understanding, necessity, and the intentionality of thought, with particular reference to the thought of Wittgenstein.

This book discusses five philosophers and writers, Hume, Kierkegaar, Camus, Simone Weil and Dostoevsky, who represents different strands of our cultural inheritance which are all theologically and religiously alive today. What they have in common is willingness to explore the borderlands between belief and unbelief and to review their own position in the light of what those coming from the opposite direction may have to teach them. What they each reject is the sort of caricature which assumes that belief an (...) unbelief and to review their own position in the light of what those coming from the opposite direction may have to teach them. What they each reject is the sort of caricature which assumes that belief and unbelief are two homogeneous wholes which have nothing to say to each other and no ground for common discussion other that that of agnosticism. Equally, however, they disdain the implications that the only possibility of dialogue is a marshmallow middle ground where the only rule is that you avoid saying what you really think. Theologians and believers have often stood back from exploration on this middle ground. Encounters with secular philosophies or systems of belief are risky and dangerous. On the other hand, a theology which avoids such encounters is a much impoverished theology. Professor Sutherland's discussion considers the nature and extent of the risk, and the title of his book indicates where the believers who live close to the boundaries often share more with neighbourly unbelievers than they do with fellow believers who view the pastures of unbelief as far distant and dangerou lands from which they will for ever remain separated. (shrink)

A team of two brothers enters a baking contest. Their cake wins the first-place prize of £500. Will they demand £500 each? Of course not. Winners must split the prize. We often ignore this when we claim credit for team accomplishments. We take more credit than we deserve. I apply this idea to baking competitions and academic production but it applies equally to other arenas with teams of varying sizes.Export citation.

This essay concerns Adorno's articulation of an idea of philosophy as it is developed through his considerations of philosophy's form or mode of presentation. It hereby attempts to illuminate some of what remains obscure about Adorno's understanding of a renewal of philosophy after Marx and the crisis of German Idealism. Various forms–from "anti-system" and "constellation" to "essay," "fragment," "encyclopaedia" and "dictionary"–are examined for what they contribute to an idea of philosophy. This focus distinguishes this essay from other studies of form (...) in Adorno that have predominantly literary or musical concerns. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Locke Butler Reid Hume Kant.

While William Hasker and I for the most part broadly agree in our opposition to much of the contemporary philosophical community concerning issues in the philosophy of mind that he discusses in his book, there are nevertheless seemingly some domestic disputes between him and me about certain matters concerning the nature of events involving the self. In this paper, I will focus on two of these disagreements. The first disagreement concerns Hasker’s treatment of what is widely known today as the (...) argument from reason and whether the events involved in our reasoning are essentially causal or teleological in nature. The second disagreement is about Hasker’s account of libertarian freedom, and whether agent causation is required to explain our free choices. (shrink)

David Widerker has forcefully argued that a libertarian is on firm ground in believing that the principle of alternative possibilities (PAP) is true. Eleonore Stump has argued that not all libertarians need accept PAP, and that its acceptance is not required for a rejection of compatibilism.This paper is a defense of Widerker against Stump. I argue that it is not at all clear that Stump’s view of freedom is libertarian in nature, and that she has not provided a good reason (...) for thinking that a libertarian can abandon PAP. (shrink)

A successful blending of extensive historical documentation with close systematic argument exhibiting the coherence and substance of this Scottish philosophical movement. By starting with the Common Sense criticism of the sceptical strain in Locke, Berkeley, and Hume, Grave vividly conveys the philosophic context and orientation of this school. The main protagonist is Thomas Reid, although the roles of Stewart, Oswald, Beattie, and others, are also explained. By resisting the temptation of writing the history of Common Sense philosophy through (...) the spectacles of the contemporary ordinary language philosophy, Grave shows that the claims as well as the perplexities of an appeal to common sense have a complex history. A cogent and comprehensive discussion of a movement that has both historical and philosophic interest for philosophy today.--R. J. B. (shrink)

Eleonore Stump has argued that a proponent of libertarian freedom must maintain that an agent is sometimes morally responsible for his mental action and that such moral responsibility is incompatible with that mental action’s being causally determined. Nevertheless, she maintains that this moral responsibility does not require that the agent be free to perform another mental action (act otherwise). In this paper, I argue that Stump fails to make a good case against the view that moral responsibility requires the freedom (...) to act otherwise. (shrink)

This article attempts to clarify an “argument from reason” set forth by C. S. Lewis in his Miracles. While there are various contemporary interpretations of the argument, Lewis intended to expose the “cardinal difficulty of naturalism.” First, this article seeks to clarify both Lewis’s argument and the understanding of naturalism that it presupposes. Second, philosophers of religion—especially, William Hasker and Alvin Plantinga—have significantly contributed to the argument’s contemporary discussion, and so their views are addressed with the intent to show how (...) they differ from Lewis’s contribution. C. S. Lewis’s argument from reason was and is remains to this day philosophically timely and deserving of serious consideration. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Descartes Malebranche and Leibniz.

In this paper, I argue that a commitment to science and the methodo- logical commitment to causal closure do not require a rejection of the idea that the choices of souls explain the occurrence of certain events in the physical world. Stated slightly differently, I maintain that one can both affirm science and believe that souls causally interfere in the course of events in the physical world. Such an affirmation and belief are compatible. In short, science vis-à-vis the methodological principle (...) of causal closure poses no problem for souls as explanatory agents. (shrink)

The formulations of the argument for atheism from evil are quite formal in nature. One “solution” to the problem of evil would be to deny that evil exists. But Clive Staples Lewis, a philosopher, would have none of this. He believed that pain is intrinsically evil, and it is its evilness that ultimately gives rise to the problem of evil. Lewis' thoughts about pain and God's reason is the subject of this chapter. The chapter also discusses Lewis's treatment of the (...) problem of evil. Lewis held that the justification for allowing human beings to experience pain is ultimately connected to the good of perfect happiness, where the enjoyment of it can be had only if persons have the freedom to choose how they will become happy, to choose to die or not to die to self. Thus, Lewis articulated his theodicy in terms of the actual individual and his or her happiness. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Causation and Dualism Why Not Locate Souls in Space? Property/Event Dualism or Dual Aspect Theory.

What are we asking when we ask, "What is the meaning of life?"? Can there be meaning without God? Is a happy life a meaningful life? Can an immoral life be meaningful? Does our suffering have meaning? Does death threaten meaning? What is this thing called The Meaning of Life? provides an engaging and stimulating introduction to philosophical thinking about life's meaning. Goetz and Seachris provide the reader with accessible examples, before looking at the main theoretical approaches to meaning and (...) key philosophers associated with them. Topics covered include: What does the question, "What is the meaning of life?", even mean? Does life have a purpose? What is valuable? Do we matter? Does life make any sense? Is there any meaning in suffering? Does death threaten meaning? Would immortality be good or bad news for us? With boxed summaries of key concepts and noteworthy examples, discussion questions, and suggestions for further reading included within each chapter, this book is the ideal introduction to life's meaning for philosophy students coming to the subject for the first time. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Evil and Contemporary Philosophical Orthodoxy Defense versus Theodicy The Free Will Defense Life's Purpose and Perfect Happiness Developing a Theodicy Adams and Horrendous Evil Plantinga's “ O Felix Culpa ” Theodicy Beasts and the Problem of Evil References.

In this paper, I respond to Joshua Mugg and James T. Turner, Jr's claim that the doctrine of the resurrection requires the numerical sameness of ante- and post-mortem bodies. I argue that they have not shown that Scripture teaches this view and, therefore, that animalism, as opposed to substance dualism, does not offer a superior explanation for the necessity of the resurrection.

The world’s major monotheistic religions typically maintain that God freely chose, in the libertarian sense, to create the universe for a reason or purpose. Philosophers of religion often argue that the idea that God makes a free choice to create for a purpose is deeply flawed. In parallel with these philosophers of religion, philosophers of action typically argue that the idea that human beings make free choices to act for purposes is also flawed. I begin my article by briefly summarizing (...) what is involved in the idea of a human agent freely choosing for a purpose. I then examine criticisms of this idea by philosophers of action and suggest how they might plausibly be rebutted. I conclude by suggesting that if these criticisms by philosophers of action are suspect, then there is good reason for thinking that the same or similar criticisms by philosophers of religion are suspect. (shrink)

An unprecedented multi-volume reference work on philosophy of religion, providing authoritative coverage of all significant concepts, figures, and movements Unmatched in scope and depth, the Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Religion provides readers with a well-balanced understanding of philosophical thought about the nature of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, and other religious traditions around the globe. Spanning across four comprehensive volumes, this groundbreaking resource contains hundreds of specially commissioned entries covering the key themes, thinkers, works, and ideas in the field. (...) Organized alphabetically, the Encyclopedia addresses an unmatched range of both historical and contemporary topics which reflect a diversity of theoretical and cultural perspectives. The entries encompass an extraordinary range of topics, from Aquinas and Kierkegaard, to teleological and ontological arguments, to cognitive science and psychology of religion, and many more. Each peer-reviewed entry is written by an acknowledged expert on the topic and includes short bibliographies, suggestions for further reading, and extensive cross-references. Accessible to scholars and non-specialist readers alike, this invaluable reference work: Provides balanced coverage of Abrahamic religions as well as different traditions from Asia, Africa, and other geographic regions Presents more than 450 entries which have been carefully reviewed by an editorial advisory board of world-renowned scholars Explores topics in various historical contexts, such as Jewish and Islamic contributions to medieval philosophy Discusses recent developments and new approaches to the study of philosophy of religion Examines significant theories and concepts including free will, atonement, moral argument, natural law, process theology, evolutionary theory, and theism Offers a fully cross-referenced and searchable online edition The first work of its kind, Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Religion is an indispensable resource for scholars and advanced students in philosophy, theology, religious studies, and relevant areas of humanities and sciences at both secular universities and theological colleges and seminaries. (shrink)

An unprecedented multi-volume reference work on philosophy of religion, providing authoritative coverage of all significant concepts, figures, and movements Unmatched in scope and depth, The Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Religion provides readers with a well-balanced understanding of philosophical thought about the nature of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, and other religious traditions around the globe. Spanning across four comprehensive volumes, this groundbreaking resource contains hundreds of specially commissioned entries covering the key themes, thinkers, works, and ideas in the field. Organized (...) alphabetically, the Encyclopedia addresses an unmatched range of both historical and contemporary topics which reflect a diversity of theoretical and cultural perspectives. The entries encompass an extraordinary range of topics, from Aquinas and Kierkegaard, to teleological and ontological arguments, to cognitive science and psychology of religion, and many more. Each peer-reviewed entry is written by an acknowledged expert on the topic and includes short bibliographies, suggestions for further reading, and extensive cross-references. Accessible to scholars and non-specialist readers alike, this invaluable reference work: Provides balanced coverage of Abrahamic religions as well as different traditions from Asia, Africa, and other geographic regions Presents more than 450 entries which have been carefully reviewed by an editorial advisory board of world-renowned scholars Explores topics in various historical contexts, such as Jewish and Islamic contributions to medieval philosophy Discusses recent developments and new approaches to the study of philosophy of religion Examines significant theories and concepts including free will, atonement, moral argument, natural law, process theology, evolutionary theory, and theism Offers a fully cross-referenced and searchable online edition The first work of its kind, The Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Religion is an indispensable resource for scholars and advanced students in philosophy, theology, religious studies, and relevant areas of humanities and sciences at both secular universities and theological colleges and seminaries. (shrink)

An unprecedented multi-volume reference work on philosophy of religion, providing authoritative coverage of all significant concepts, figures, and movements Unmatched in scope and depth, The Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Religion provides readers with a well-balanced understanding of philosophical thought about the nature of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, and other religious traditions around the globe. Spanning across four comprehensive volumes, this groundbreaking resource contains hundreds of specially commissioned entries covering the key themes, thinkers, works, and ideas in the field. Organized (...) alphabetically, the Encyclopedia addresses an unmatched range of both historical and contemporary topics which reflect a diversity of theoretical and cultural perspectives. The entries encompass an extraordinary range of topics, from Aquinas and Kierkegaard, to teleological and ontological arguments, to cognitive science and psychology of religion, and many more. Each peer-reviewed entry is written by an acknowledged expert on the topic and includes short bibliographies, suggestions for further reading, and extensive cross-references. Accessible to scholars and non-specialist readers alike, this invaluable reference work: Provides balanced coverage of Abrahamic religions as well as different traditions from Asia, Africa, and other geographic regions Presents more than 450 entries which have been carefully reviewed by an editorial advisory board of world-renowned scholars Explores topics in various historical contexts, such as Jewish and Islamic contributions to medieval philosophy Discusses recent developments and new approaches to the study of philosophy of religion Examines significant theories and concepts including free will, atonement, moral argument, natural law, process theology, evolutionary theory, and theism Offers a fully cross-referenced and searchable online edition The first work of its kind, The Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Religion is an indispensable resource for scholars and advanced students in philosophy, theology, religious studies, and relevant areas of humanities and sciences at both secular universities and theological colleges and seminaries. (shrink)

Why an encyclopedia of the philosophy of religion? Because human beings have been and continue to be religious. Indeed, if one thinks in terms of what it is to be human, what is the essence of a human being, one can reasonably hold that it includes the property of trying to make sense of things and events, and religion, in terms of both belief and practice, is a way of doing this. A religious response to this attempt at sense-making in (...) no way implies that those who are not religious are not trying to make sense of things.They are, but conclude that the sought-after intelligibility, if it can be had, can be had without religion. So if one thinks of philosophy as, at least in part, a rational pursuit of intelligibility about things and events, then the philosophy of religion can plausibly be construed as the pursuit of this intelligibility in religious terms, and an encyclopedia of philosophy of religion as an orderly assemblage of entries about this rational undertaking. While the philosophy of religion has often been thought of as a "Western" activity which is engaged in by those in the Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), from the inception of this project we have believed it is important to think globally in terms of the scope of entries included in the encyclopedia. Hence, there are not only numerous entries on topics and individuals within the Abrahamic religious traditions, but also equally numerous entries on issues and people in Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, and other religious traditions.We have sought to be diverse in terms of the inclusion of entries across the religious world, not because we believe diversity and inclusion are goods in their own right, but because they are instrumental to helping us think more clearly about the overall intellectual project of making sense of things in terms of religion. Some persons might object that because the idea of making sense of things is a rational notion and religion, when properly understood, is at its core a rejection of the notion that things and events are intelligible, the philosophy of religion is itself a deeply incoherent intellectual discipline. Indeed, if we assume a desire tomake sense of things, the attempt to fulfill this desire along with perhaps its eventual frustration is a source of suffering. And who wants to suffer? Thus religion at its core is about giving up on the attempt to make sense of things and to achieve a state of "mind" in which there is nothingness or oneness with all things and, as a result, nothing distinct from other things of which to make sense. While this point is well made and appreciated, it nevertheless is also a fact that anyone reading one or more of the entries in this encyclopedia of the philosophy of religion is a person who is seeking to learn about, and thus make sense of, something or someone related to a particular religion or religions. So at least to this degree the reader is an individual who is pursuing intelligibility about that which is religious, or related to what is religious, in nature. And an initial assumption that the attempt to satisfy the desire for intelligibility through religion must fail and produce suffering is at least questionable. Finally, because this is an encyclopedia of the philosophy of religion, there are many entries about views and peoplewho believe that there are good reasons to reject religion altogether. These entries are warranted because the issues and people they cover occupy an important place in the dialogue that takes place between individuals with differing views who live in a shared global space. (shrink)

Clive Staples Lewis, a philosopher, regarded his argument from reason and soul‐body dualism as the primary principle for illuminating the Incarnation. However, he believed there is an additional illuminative principle, what he termed “the pattern of descent and reascension”. Given the centrality of the idea of descent and reascent in Lewis' thought about the meaning of life and its importance for understanding the Grand Miracle that is the Incarnation, this chapter gives an extended discussion of it. Lewis was a hedonist (...) about happiness, and his understanding of happiness provided the backdrop for his acceptance of the paradox of hedonism and the need to die to self. Lewis was a lover of myth and came to the conclusion that Christianity is a true myth. The chapter briefly explains how the descent‐reascent/dying‐rising motif was important in leading him to this conclusion. (shrink)

In his two first-rate books, ’Consciousness and the Existence of God: A Theistic Argument’ and ’The Recalcitrant Imago Dei: Human Persons and the Failure of Naturalism’, J. P. Moreland argues that our existence as conscious beings presents insurmountable problems for naturalism and evidence for theism. In this review, I summarize Moreland’s treatment of three issues in scientific theory acceptance, which he claims are relevant to determining which worldview, theism or naturalism, is better able to explain the existence of conscious mental (...) entities. I then raise some questions about their supposed relevance and conclude with some thoughts about the simplicity and immateriality of the soul. (shrink)

This chapter discusses Clive Staples Lewis's views about the purpose of life. Lewis himself believed that nature does not have its own purposes. Instead, he thought God created the natural world, and the human beings which inhabit it, for a purpose. Lewis believed the purpose of life is that we experience a happiness that he variably described as eternal, infinite, complete, or perfect. The experience of this happiness is the life of the blessed. Lewis thought happiness is experiencing pleasure, where (...) experiencing pleasure is the purpose for which God created us. A hedonist about happiness is someone who believes not only that pleasure is intrinsically good but also holds that pain is intrinsically evil. To say that the experience of pain is intrinsically evil is to say that pain is evil and does not derive its evilness from its relationship to anything else. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Naturalism versus Theism The Physical World Cross‐Cultured Inquiry Value Inquiry.

This chapter contains sections titled: The Soul and the Brain The Soul and Scientific Methodology Soul‐Body Causal Interaction and the Conservation of Energy.

This chapter contains sections titled: Augustine Aquinas.

Clive Staples Lewis, a philosopher, believed that our thought is inherently about things. Because it is, we are able to construct derivative forms of aboutness that represent things. Lewis considered a characteristic in his treatment of the philosophical theory that is called as “naturalism”. Lewis believed that a view like naturalism, which implies that a mental phenomenon like reasoning must and will ultimately be entirely explicable in nonmental and non‐psychological terms, “is really a theory that there is no reasoning”. Lewis (...) wrote in the margin of his edition of Aristotle's Ethica Nicomachea that “the 'parts of the soul' are only a metaphor”. He was convinced that a belief in dualism is essentially an ordinary belief in a distinction between a soul and its body. Beliefs about the natures of the body and the soul have to await philosophical reflection. Common sense itself is philosophically idle. (shrink)