PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION: RELIGION AND THE NATURAL SCIENCES – SESSION 1 (SEPTEMBER 11, 2013)Matthias de Vrieshof 2/006A, woe, 13.15-15.00

Prof.dr. W.B. Drees; Code 59645285W; 5 ec, niveau 500w.b.drees@hum.leidenuniv.nl; T. +31 71 527 1628. Office: Matthias de Vrieshof 1 /102c.

1. COURSE DESCRIPTION – see syllabus, also with provisional programme by week

2. LECTURE: PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION, RELIGION, RELIGION AND SCIENCE

1. Philosophy- Knowledge about great philosophers?- Thinking about a theme, raising certain types of questions – often stepping back from the discussion itself, to ask about assumptions, methods, concepts, consistency, arguments, etc.- Typical triplet of questions:

1. Conceptual: What do we mean by …. ?2. Truth: Does … exist? (Or ‘ is plausible? Or: is possible?) 3. Consequences: If … were to be true, what would follow?

E.g. in discussion on ‘free will and determinism’:1. What do we mean by ‘determinism’?2. Is determinism true of our world?3. If determinism were true, what would follow for responsibility?

2. Philosophy of religion- Religion is object of study in Philosophy of Religion, not its method, nature or purpose.- Religious philosophy: Philosophy that seeks to answer religious or existential questions.- Christian philosophy: Philosophy from a Christian perspective.

Examples of book titles: Denkend geloven (H.G. Hubbeling)Gelovend denken R. van Woudenberg)

- Philosophy of religion in relation to religious studies/ history of religions?Philosophy of religion is religious studies plus truth/ value question (approach inspired by H.G. Hubbeling, Principles of the Philosophy of Religion)

- Philosophy of religion in relation to theologyTheology as reflective, scholarly work within a faith traditionPhilosophy of religion is systematic theology minus appeals to revelation/ authority/ tradition/ feelings and sentiments

- Theology: various levels of languageReligious practice: speaking to GodReligious reflection: speaking about GodScholarly reflection: speaking about ‘God’ ‘religious studies’

Where would a philosopher who argues for atheism fit?

1

3. ReligionWhich religions?

‘The seven world religions’ - which ones?Which religions have your interest?

General term: substantive, common core, essence? nominalist, human construction, e.g. in colonial contexts?

Definition has normative or political aspects; Especially regarding boundaries, e.g. with ‘pseudo-religion’ ; ‘superstition’, ‘sect’ ?Is scientology a religion?‘ Islam is not a religion but an ideology’

Many facetsPractices, e.g. rituals, prayer doingCommunities, e.g. churches belongingBeliefs, dogma believing Experiential: trust, awe, guilt, … experiencing

Four modes (Eric Sharpe; see Drees 2010, p. 65)1. Existential mode2. Intellectual mode3. Institutional mode4. Ethical mode

Political dimension: Who is to say what counts as genuine religion? A scholarly question?A theological one?A political one?An anthropological one?

Anthropological definition Clifford Geertz (see Drees 2010, 68; Geertz 1966, 4; 1973, 90)‘synthesize ethos … and world view’

A religion is (1) a system of symbols which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by(3) formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions which such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic.

‘A theology’ as a combination of worldview and ethos (Drees 2010, 77f)Theology = cosmology + axiology

e.g. ‘brothers and sisters, we are all children of God’ Merely empirical genetic testing whether brothers and sisters?Merely moral treat each other as if brothers and sisters?Religious meaning: The moral message, anchored in a world view (as being created by God, who wants us to treat each other as …)

‘ the manner of our acceptance of the universe’ (William James; Drees 2010, 78)Scheme (p. 80)

- Schleiermacher: neither metaphysics nor morality, but a different category (Drees, 82ff)

2

4. Religion and science

- Modern challenges that have ancient roots:* relation to secular wisdom (Greek philosophy, Aristotle, etc)* relation to other religions (heresy and ‘atheism’, succession, primitive, …)* relation to key experiences, especially evil* challenging explanations of itself, e.g. self-interest, group pressure, illusion, …* culturally situated (‘If the horses had gods, …’)

- ‘Religion and science’ as a window on many issues in the philosophy of religion* definitions, concepts* truth, plausibility, and possibility,* method, ‘ how do we know?’ * consequences – ‘ what if …’?

- Current landscape:* Shaped by Western discussions, and even more by Anglo-American ones* Often apologetic, in context of secularization (see Drees 2010, 3ff)* Could be more concerned about superstition (as skeptics; see Drees 2010, 5f)

- Current landscape of ‘religion and science’:* Shaped by Western discussions, and even more by Anglo-American ones* Often apologetic, in context of secularization (see Drees 2010, 3ff)* Could be more concerned about superstition (as skeptics; see Drees 2010, 5f)

- As a first approximation, a classification developed by Ian Barbour may be useful. Barbour is an American physicist who also became a theologian, and who has written various works on religion and science since 1965. The classification is found, for instance, in (Barbour 2000, 7-38).

1. Conflicta. Science inspired: materialism, naturalism, atheismb. Religiously inspired: Biblical literalism, creationism, fundamentalism

2. Independence, different, complementarya. Separate domains (facts/ valuesb. Different languages, questions (how, why?), functions

3. Dialogue (interacting, though distinct)a. Presuppositions and limit-questionsb. Methodological and conceptual parallels

4. Integrationa. Natural theology (from nature/science to a religious view)

3

b. Theology of nature (from a religious perspective towards understanding the world)c. Systematic, philosophical integration

We will make extensive use of Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science. As electronic journal available via the University Library. Brief history. Other journals: Theology and Science; Science and Christian Belief; Islamic Sciences; …

3. ASSIGNMENT FOR NEXT WEEK

Write a brief essay on the usefulness of the category ‘conflict’ in the light of the following two articles:

Geoffrey Cantor, Chris Kenny, “Barbour’s Fourfold Way: Problems with His Taxonomy of Science-Religion Relationships.” Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 36 (4, December 2001): 765-781.

Robert Olson, “A Dynamic Model for ‘Science and Religion’: Interacting Subcultures.” Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 46 (1, March 2011): 65-83.

For each article, one may pose three different questions:Q.1. What is the position the author opposes? Q.2. What is the main criticism offered? Q.3. Does the author propose an alternative? If so, what is the alternative?

Besides, you might also consider the following question:Q.4. Which of these views is applicable to a situation you are familiar with?

Prepare a written report on the paper in light of these questions, comparing and contrasting the two papers read.

Form aspects:- Typed- A title (not ‘reading report’; a title can be a brief way of communicating your main point)- Your name immediately below the title- Size about 1000 words (three pages); minimum 500 words, maximum 1500 words.- Use paragraphs to distinguish subsequent sections of your presentation.- Have a very brief introductory paragraph, a few sentences describing what will be done- There should also be a brief concluding paragraph, looking back on what has been done.- References at the end. In this case, that might be just the articles you are reporting on.- In the article, use author-date style of citation (just as in the articles).

Deadline: By e-mail (w.b.drees@hum.leidenuniv.nl ) as attachment, not later than Tuesday September 17, 12.00.

Bring a copy with you to class as well, so that you have it at hand when we discuss these papers.

4