My Identity Is Personal

Two cartoons on personal identity:

1. Does physical or mental continuity matter? Let's think about teletransportation...
   
   


2. Perhaps our identity is all in the way we're arranged:
   
   

Final Exam

Just a reminder that the final exam is Friday, December 18th, at 11:00 a.m. in our normal classroom. You'll have 50 minutes to take it.

After that, we're done! Then, time to enjoy your break. COMMENCE WINTER-TIME ENJOYMENTATIONALIZING...NESS.

12/14 Class Canceled

I'm sick, so Monday's class is canceled. This confuses a few things logistically, so here are the changes:

• You can hand in your journal on either Wednesday (12/16) or Friday (12/18).
• The group presentations on personal identity and Nietzsche will now go on Wednesday, December 16th.
• The final exam will still be Friday, December 18th, and we'll still be reviewing for it in class on Wednesday.
  

Nihilism, Like Life, Is Absurd

Here is one (mildly depressing) approach to the meaning of life that our group referenced:

• "The Myth of Sisyphus" by Albert Camus
  
• "The Absurd" by Thomas Nagel

Faith & Reason: Strange Bedfellows?

For more on today's presentation:

• "The Ethics of Belief," William Clifford's classic argument for evidentialism
  
• "The Will to Believe," William James's nonevidentialist response to Clifford
  
• "Believing Without Evidence," a modern-day evidentialist's take on the Clifford-James debate

It Pays to Believe?

Here are some links on Pascal's Wager:

• Links to several articles on the argument.
• Here's an audio interview on the argument and Pascal's entire work Pensées.
  
• NOTHING TO LOSE? Is there really not much to lose in this wager? This cartoon thinks otherwise.
• WHICH GOD? With so many religions out there, which God should we believe in? This cartoon dinosaur has the most practical solution.
• More on decision theory, the branch of math Pascal uses to argue that belief in God is a good bet.
  
• Some related entries in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: evidentialism vs. nonevidentialism, religious versions of nonevidentialism (or fideism), other pragmatic arguments for believing in god, and Pascal's other contributions to philosophy.

Hear No Evil

If you like to get philosophical on the treadmill, try downloading and listening to these podcasts on the problem of evil:

• Well-known contemporary philosopher (and ordained priest) Marilyn McCord Adams offers some insights into the problem of evil in this audio interview. (Download)
  
• The NPR program Fresh Air has an audio interview with Bart Ehrman on the problem of suffering. (Download)
  
• Here's even more audio from a few philosophers on the problem of suffering. (Download)
  
  

Evil-iness

Here's Stephen Colbert's take on evil:

Bad Things to Good People

Here are some links on the problem of evil.

• There is a collection of resources all about the problem of evil, including criticisms of several different responses to the problem. I mean, wow.
• I'd like to highlight one article in particular: a discussion of the "God works in mysterious ways" response: do we have enough evidence to believe that there is a reason for all the suffering in the world, but humans aren't smart enough to understand what that reason is?
• Thoughts on everyday evil and the Holocaust.
  
• Does everything happen for a reason? This cartoon dinosaur has an interesting take on that question. (T-Rex also occasionally wonders why bad things happen to nice people, and whether we're in the worst possible world.)

More With the Creepy Guy

Here are some recommended videos on the design argument from Closer to Truth:

• Philosopher Richard Swinburne likes the design argument. (Part 2 of his interview is here.)
  
• Philosopher Bede Rundle is less convinced.
• Philosopher Colin McGinn tackles the issue of fine-tuning.
  

Journal Guideline

UPDATE 12/1: New due date!

Here is a guideline for the next big assignment: the journal you have to keep during our discussion of God.

Worth: 15% of your overall grade

New Due Date: the beginning of class on Monday, December 7th, Wednesday, December 16th, 2009

The assignment is to keep a journal during our section on philosophy of religion. I want you to write several short journal entries about the various arguments for and against the existence of God. We’ll be going over all these arguments in class during the next few weeks. Each entry should be around two paragraphs long.

This assignment is a chance for you to do philosophy. I want you to demonstrate that you understand what we are reading and discussing. (Present each argument in your own words.) In addition to this, I want you to critically evaluate each argument we read and discuss. (Are any premises questionable? Does the argument provide enough support for its conclusion?) It is also a chance for you to give your opinion on these arguments, and defend your opinion with good reasons.

You should have the following journal entries, in this order:

1) Your first entry on your thoughts about God before discussing any of this stuff in class. Do you think there is a God? Why or why not?

2) An entry explaining and evaluating the cosmological argument (Aquinas reading).

3) An entry explaining and evaluating the ontological argument (Anselm & Guanilo readings).

3) An entry explaining and evaluating the design argument (Hume reading).

4) An entry explaining and evaluating the problem of evil argument (Augustine and B.C. Johnson readings).

5) A final entry where you discuss your thoughts about God after reading these philosophers and discussing this in class. Has your opinion about God changed? Have your reasons for your opinion changed?

The journal does not have to be typed. There is no length requirement. (Again, the suggestion is around two paragraphs per journal entry.)