Extra Credit

The extra credit assignment is optional. It's due at the beginning of class on Tuesday, December 2nd, for the Pemberton class, and at the beginning of class on Friday, December 12th, for the Willingboro class. Your assignment is to write a reading response (about 250-500 words) on the following topic:

Explain and evaluate Pascal's Wager.

• First, briefly explain the argument Blaise Pascal gives that we should believe in God.
  
• Then, evaluate the argument. Are his reasons true, false, or questionable? Do they give us good support to buy his conclusion?
  
• Finally, tell me your opinion. Do you think it is a good argument or a bad argument? Why? Be sure to defend your opinion with reasons.

The assignment is based on the Pascal reading from the textbook. Like the other reading responses, you won't be graded on your opinion. You'll be graded on how well you DEFEND your opinion. This assignment is potentially worth the value of half a reading response (up to 25 points).

Also, just a reminder: the 4th reading response is a freebie. You don't have to write one, and everyone will get full credit for it.

You're welcome!

Bad Things to Good People

Here are some links on the problem of evil.

The first link is a collection of resources all about the problem of evil, including criticisms of several different responses to the problem. I mean, wow.

The NPR program Fresh Air has an audio interview with Bart Ehrman on the problem of suffering.

Next is 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?

Finally, 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.)

Reading Response #3

Reading Response #3 is due at the beginning of class on Thursday, November 20th for the Pemberton class, and Friday, November 21st for the Willingboro class. Here is the assignment:

Explain and evaluate the Design Argument for God's existence.

• First, briefly explain whatever version of the Design Argument you prefer to explain: Paley's argument by analogy, the inductive version Hume criticizes, or the abductive version we discussed in class.
  
• Then, tell me your opinion. Do you think it is a good argument or a bad argument? Why? Be sure to defend your opinion with reasons.

The response is based on the William Paley and David Hume readings from the textbook. Like the other reading responses, you won't be graded on your opinion. You'll be graded on how well you DEFEND your opinion.

Like A Watch, Only More So

Here are some links on the design argument for God's existence. First is a radio interview on Hume's criticisms of the design arg. Second is an article on evolution versus intelligent design.

Third is the article about all the "design flaws" in nature. Fourth, here's an article on the recent research that might show the appendix serves a purpose, and so wouldn't count as a design flaw.

I also have a little music for you. Here's the source of the "more so" phrase:

John Gorka - I'm From New Jersey
"I'm from New Jersey | It's like Ohio | But even more so | Imagine that"

Finally, the National Public Radio show Fresh Air ran a pair of interviews with two scientists talking about whether God exists. The conversations touch on a lot of things we've been discussing in class.

Richard Dawkins pushing atheism

Francis Collins pushing theism

Hey, where's the interview with an agnostic? The media are so biased toward those with opinions.

If you've read a good article on intelligent design, recommend it to us by emailing me or posting the link in the comments section of this post.

Think [Tap-Dance] God

There's a philosophy comic strip that ran a whole series on the ontological argument that god exists. Here are links to the comics:

Comic #1: The argument

Comic #2: Existence is better? Huh?

Comic #3: So the greatest possible pizza exists?

Comic #4: The perfect girlfriend!

If you're still jonesing for the a priori, there's also this entry on ontological arguments in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Or maybe you like modal logic? If so, try Godel's version of the ontological argument.

Finally, here's what Guanilo said to Anselm after he presented Anselm his "Greatest Possible Island" criticism: