Search Results for: Michael W. Austin

Web Project: PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUES IN ‘AFTERLIFE APOLOGETICS’


The Evangelical Philosophical Society (EPS) is pleased to introduce a unique and ongoing project on “Philosophical Issues in ‘Afterlife Apologetics’: Assessing the Evidential Values of Near-Death and Deathbed Experiences.” Your contributions, readership, exploration and support are most welcomed. For more on this theme and additional Christian contributions to philosophy, become a subscriber – for as low as $25 per year! – to Philosophia Christithe peer-reviewed journal of the EPS (all EPS members receive Philosophia Christi as part of their membership).


Project Summary

Afterlife Apologetics proposes that the best studies of near-death experiences (NDEs) and deathbed experiences (DBEs) provide evidence for the existence of a personal, loving God, a separation of the soul/mind from the body at death, the afterlife, and much more. Yet, Christian scholars have been slow to assess the data accumulated by 50 years of near-death studies and over 130 years of deathbed studies. This web project encourages participation by philosophers and theologians in this emerging field with candid reflections, challenges, and observations from various related fields of study. Multidisciplinary insights are encouraged with an emphasis on ‘philosophy of’ factors and their implications for Christian apologetics.

The International Association for Near-Death Studies defines an NDE as “a distinct subjective experience that a minority of people report after a near-death episode. In a near-death episode, a person is either clinically dead, near-death, or in a situation where death is likely or expected.” Core elements include leaving the body, otherworldly vistas, visiting with deceased relatives, angels and God, absence of time, mind-to-mind communication, passing through tunnels, life reviews, a decision to return, return to the body.”

Our definition for DBEs is our own, since many terms have been in use to refer to several different experiences surrounding death. DBEs are here defined as “a cluster of experiences surrounding final earthly death, including deathbed visions, terminal lucidity, crisis apparitions, shared death experiences, premonitions of death, and after death communications.”

Areas of the Web Project

We are focused on philosophical topics related to the afterlife and how other areas of importance (e.g., substance dualism versus monism, phenomenology, plausibility of miracles, theism, visions, religious experience, grief studies) bear upon an assessment of the evidential values of near-death and deathbed experiences.

Current Papers

Core Project Questions

Seven core areas of project inquiry:

  1. What might be philosophical, theological, or historical, sociological, and institutional reasons that have contributed to Christian scholars slowly/cautiously assessing the data that has been accumulated by 50 years of near-death studies and over 130 years of deathbed studies?
  2. What are the strengths and limitations of different epistemic perspectives (e.g., first-person perspective, compared to second-person or third-person perspectives) when describing and explaining NDEs and DBEs?
  3. What insights from this emerging field might apply to/from such philosophical/theological specialties as substance dualism, phenomenology, the problem of evil, moral absolutes, the emergence of religious beliefs in ancient and indigenous cultures, supernaturalism, miracles, visions, and the resurrection of Jesus?
  4. Which worldview(s) provide the best fit for the present state of NDE/DBE data? How/Why?
    • Do naturalistic explanations (e.g., anoxia, hallucinations, latent brain activity at death) provide satisfactory explanations of NDEs/DBEs?
    • Are NDEs most consistent with Christianity, Islam, New Age, Hindu, or another religion?
    • Are elements such as reincarnation and universalism widely reported in such experiences, or are they so rare as to be anomalous?
    • Do Christians typically report seeing Jesus, while Muslims report Muhammad and Buddhists report Buddha?
  5. Are the types of evidences used in this field truly scientific? How can our understandings of “science,” “the scientific method,” “historical evidence,” “legal evidence,” and “testimonial evidence” clarify the claimed quality of evidence?
  6. How can we differentiate seemingly legitimate reports from those influenced by mental illness, demonic activity, attention-getters, etc.?
  7. What are some compelling epistemic and institutional factors to weigh and envision for the future development of a philosophical Afterlife Apologetics?
    • What specific holes in the research need to be filled? How can philosophers best contribute?
    • How can philosophers most efficiently get up to speed in this field (e.g., review and contribute to the most important studies, summaries of studies, bibliographies, and literature reviews, including literature attempting integration with Christianity.)
    • Should the development of the field be seen as an extension of insights from philosophy of religion, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of science?
    • Could/should Afterlife Apologetics be seen as a form of “Ramified Natural Theology”?
    • What can positively shape the plausibility conditions for thinking that Afterlife Apologetics can compel believability in the Trinitarian God of the Bible (vs. a more generic theism)?
    • Given the philosophical-theological merits and limits of an Afterlife Apologetics, is it best articulated in a cumulative apologetic approach (vs. a ‘stand-alone’ argument)?

Find this Project Interesting? Enjoy other EPS Web Projects


Want to Contribute to the Project on Philosophical Issues in ‘Afterlife Apologetics’?

Options for Contributing: We’re open to a wide variety of contributions, since this is an emerging field, including, but not limited to philosophizing about fresh research, developing reflection essays (e.g., from a first-person perspective) about a personal experience or one from your circles of trust, responses to other essays [critical or confirmatory or clarifying], summaries of research, book reviews, theological/biblical contributions, practical essays on harnessing afterlife apologetics to impact others, ministering to those who’ve had such experiences, etc. We welcome responses to any of the Project’s papers.

Length: While longer papers [6,000 + words] are permitted, shorter papers [500-2000 words] may invite more responses to specific ideas. Consider dividing longer pieces into several essays, each covering a tidy topic.

Suggested topics: Near-death experiences as evidence for the afterlife and cumulative arguments for theism; explanatory opportunities and limits to ‘Afterlife Apologetics’; assessment of methodological issues when researching and assessing the plausibility of NDEs and DBEs;

Explore further with the co-editors, including different possible levels of engagement with the project.

Submit a Proposal: Email a topic, thesis and description of the proposed paper (250 words max) to Project Editors J. Steve Miller and Stuart H. Gray [see below]. They will help guide your proposal toward being a contribution of this web project.

Lead Project Editors & Coordinators

Web Project Overseer: Joseph E. Gorra, Consulting Editor, Philosophia Christi.


Please consider becoming a regular annual or monthly financial partner with the Evangelical Philosophical Society in order to expand its reach, support its members, and be a credible presence of Christ-shaped philosophical interests in the academy and into the wider culture!

2024 Annual Meeting Panel Discussions

In addition to dozens of sessions on individual paper presentations at the annual meeting, come enjoy several EPS interested discussions throughout EPS and ETS programming. Consider joining the following sessions:

Wednesday, November 20th:

  • 10:10 AM – 11:40 AM (Pacific Ballroom 14): “God and Political Power.” Panelists include: Stephen Wolfe (Princeton University), Tyler Dalton McNabb (Saint Francis University), Mike Austin (Eastern Kentucky University).
  • 1:00 PM – 3:20 PM (Pacific Ballroom 14): “Practicing the Presence of God.” Moderator: Robert Garcia (Baylor University). Panelists include: J. P. Moreland (Biola University), Juliana Kazemi (Baylor University), Fred Aquino (Abilene Christian University), Kristen Irwin (Loyola University Chicago), Paul Rezkalla (Baylor University), Dolores Morris (University of South Florida), Michael Willenborg (Baylor University).
  • 1:00 PM – 4:10 PM (San Diego Ballroom C): “Natural Law and the Shape of Christian Ethics: Prospects, Promises, and Perils.” Moderator: Jason Thacker (Boyce College). Paper presentations from, and discussion with, Dennis Hollinger (Gordon Conwell), David VanDrunen (Westminster Seminary California), and David Haines (Bethlehem College & Seminary).

Thursday, November 21st:

  • 8:30 AM – 11:40 AM (Ballroom 16): “Book Panel Discussion: Transformed into the Same Image: Constructive Investigations into the Doctrine of Deification.” Moderators: Paul Copan (Palm Beach Atlantic University) and Michael Reardon (Canada Christian College). Includes various papers and panel discussion from Copan and Reardon, Carl Mosser (Independent Scholar), Ben Blackwell (Westminster Theological Centre), Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen (Fuller Theological Seminary / University of Helsinki), Brian Siukit Chiu (Biola University), and Fred Sanders (Biola University).
  • 8:30 AM – 11:40 AM (Rancho Santa Fe 3): Gender as Love: Dialoguing with Fellipe Do Vale.” Moderator: Daniel Hill (Baylor University). Includes papers and discussion from Gregg Allison (Southern Baptist Theological Seminary), Dustyn Elizabeth Keepers (Baker Academic Publishing), Christopher Woznicki (Jonathan Edwards Center at Gateway Seminary), Kirsten Sanders (Independent Scholar), and Fellipe do Vale (Trinity Evangelical Divinity School).
  • 9:20 AM – 11:40 AM (Pacific Ballroom 17): “Atonement and the Death of Christ: A Symposium” with William Lane Craig (Biola University), Oliver Crisp (University of St. Andrews), Joshua Thurow (University of Texas San Antonio), Jonathan Rutledge (Harvard University), Danielle Jansen (University of St. Andrews), and Aaron Davis (University of St. Andrews).
  • 3:00 PM – 6:10 PM (Pacific Ballroom 15): “Design Writ Large: Design Arguments, Design Detection, and Natural Theology.” Moderator: John Bloom. Panelist include: William Dembski (Discovery Institute), David Haines (Bethlehem College and Seminary), Douglas Axe (Biola University), Bruce L. Gordon (The Saint Constantine College / Discovery Institute).

Friday, November 22nd:

  • 8:30 AM – 11:40 AM (Pacific Ballroom 16): “Origin of the Soul: A Conversation.” Moderator: Ronnie Campbell (Liberty University). Panelists include: Joshua R. Farris (Ruhr-Universität Bochum), Bruce L. Gordon (The Saint Constantine College / Discovery Institute), Joanna Leidenhag (University of Leeds), William Hasker (Anderson University), James T. Turner (Anderson University).
  • 8:30 AM – 11:40 AM (Marriott Grand Ballroom 3): “It’s Not the End of the World: Putting Elections in Theological Perspective.” Moderator: Vincent Bacote (Wheaton College). Panelists includes: Luke Bretherton (Duke Divinity School), Fellipe do Vale (Trinity Evangelical Divinity School), Mark McDowell (Reformed Theological Seminary), Kaitlyn Schiess (Duke Divinity School).
  • 2:00 PM – 5:10 PM (Pacific Ballroom 14): “The Ballot and the Bible: Dialoguing with Kaitlyn Schiess on the Use of Scripture in American Politics.” Moderator: Ryan Peterson (Talbot School of Theology). Panelists include: Malcolm Foley (Baylor University), Miranda Cruz (Indiana Wesleyan University), Preston Sprinkle (Theology in the Raw), Kristen Deede Johnson (Western Theological Seminary), and Matthew Anderson (Baylor University).
  • 3:00 PM – 6:10 PM (Marriott Grand Ballroom 2): “Cancel Culture, Freedom of Speech, Religious Freedom, and the Gospel: Dealing with Difference in a Pluralistic World” with various papers and panel discussion from Darrell Bock (Dallas Theological Seminary), Eric Patterson (Regent University), John Hartley (Rivendell Institute), and C. Donald Smedley (Rivendell Institute).

Join the EPS membership today for as low as $25/yr and receive an annual subscription to the Society’s peer-reviewed journal, Philosophia Christi.

Taking Persons Seriously and Bioethics

In June 2024, Pickwick Publications released the notable volume, Taking Persons Seriously: Where Philosophy and Bioethics Intersect, co-edited by EPS members and Philosophia Christi contributors, Mihretu P. Guta and Scott B. Rae.

From the publisher’s description:

This volume attempts to show why ontology matters for a proper grasp of issues in bioethics. Contemporary discussions on bioethics often focus on seeking solutions for a wide range of issues that revolve around persons. The issues in question are multi-layered, involving such diverse aspects as the metaphysical/ontological, personal, medical, moral, legal, cultural, social, political, religious, and environmental. In navigating through such a complex web of issues, it has been said that the central problems philosophers and bioethicists face are ethical in nature. In this regard, biomedical sciences and technological breakthroughs take a leading role in terms of shaping the sorts of questions that give rise to ethical problems. For example, is it ethical to keep terminally ill patients alive on dialysis machines or artificial ventilators? Is it ethical to take someone’s vital organs upon death and transplant them into another person’s body without any prior consent from the deceased person? Reproductive techniques also raise complicated ethical issues involving in vitro fertilization, contraceptives, prenatal testing, abortions, and genetic enhancements. Moreover, biomedical issues raise ethical problems regarding research on human subjects, stem cell research, and enhancement biotechnology. The beginning and end of life issues bring up their own complicated ethical conundrums involving, among other things, terminating life support and euthanasia. This book approaches such complex bioethical questions by engaging in ground-level debates about the ontology of persons. This is a nonnegotiable first step in taking steps forward in seeking a plausible solution(s) for the complex ethical problems in bioethics.

Current EPS President, Michael Austin, says of the book, “To reach sound conclusions about bioethical issues, we need a proper understanding of the nature of human persons. This collection of essays will be helpful to anyone who wants to deepen their understanding of what human persons are, why they matter, and the ways such an understanding should guide our approach to theory and practice in bioethics.”

Gupta currently teaches philosophy at Biola University and Azusa Pacific University. He is an associate fellow of the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity at Trinity International University. Rae is senior advisor to the president at Biola University, dean of faculty, and professor of Christian ethics at Talbot School of Theology, Biola University. He is a fellow of the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity and the Wilberforce Forum.

Join the EPS membership today for as low as $25/yr and receive an annual subscription to the Society’s peer-reviewed journal, Philosophia Christi.

The ‘Virtue of Obedience’ in Hudson’s Fallenness and Flourishing

Philosophers Michael Austin (Eastern Kentucky), Charity Anderson (Baylor), and Kent Dunnington (Biola) reflect on Hud Hudson’s Fallenness and Flourishing (Oxford, 2021) in a recent book symposia discussion (introduced by James Arcadi) at the Henry Center’s Sapientia.

Hud Hudson is Professor of Philosophy at Western Washington University, and the author of multiple books, including A Grotesque in the Garden (Eerdmans, 2020).

In his essay, Kent Dunnington shows that Hudson’s story can be ‘compressed’ as follows

(1) The world is bleak and most everybody is ill-off and unhappy.

(2) This is a consequence of human sin, especially our prideful efforts to pursue happiness independently of God.

(3) Such efforts mire us in unhappiness, particularly in the deadly sin of sloth: apathetic resistance to the demands of love.

(4) Since sloth diminishes human agency, we need God’s atoning grace to extricate ourselves from our unhappiness.

(5) The virtue of obedience opens us up to this grace.

While Dunnington shares Hudson’s “penchant for pessimism” he is, “less confident than [Hudson] that pessimism as a philosophy of life is warranted or beneficial.” Among other important questions, Dunnington wonders “how essential, really, is Hudson’s pessimism to his overall argument?” What if, Dunnington raises, (1) were replaced by

(1*) The world is brimming with gratuitous goodness, yet most of us persistently ignore, reject, and efface it.

in Hudson’s story?

Mike Austin praises Hudson’s book for “its philosophical quality but also for its deep insight into issues that relate to spiritual and moral formation.”

A slow and reflective reading on the nature of sloth as it is analyzed in the pages of this book would be potentially very useful for such purposes. This is moral philosophy and moral theology at its best, offering wisdom that can be lived.

Austin thinks that Hudson has made a “strong prima facie case for understanding obedience as a virtue. ” How does Hudson conceive of obedience? According to Austin (quoting Hudson), obedience is conceived as

an abiding and deeply seated pro-attitude towards uniting one’s will with God’s will and a robust and stable set of dispositions aimed at combatting . . . our perpetual state of concupiscence which is daily fueled by self-love . . . self-deceit . . . the lesser goods of pleasure, knowledge, and power in the world.” It includes the positive “disposition to commit oneself to God’s revealed word by faith, to persevere in the hope for the realization of the promises of that word, and to promote that realization in the exercise of charity through properly grounded love of God and neighbor (pp. 162–63). 

Austin’s essay goes on to examine “some important ways that hope can and ought to play in relation to Hudson’s four components of obedience: humility, restraint, response, and love.”

Charity Anderson commends Hudson’s book as an “engaging and creative attempt to diagnose one of the most important problems that human beings face—the failure to flourish—and offer a path forward . . .”

Anderson’s essay engages with two different parts of the book: First, she examines theodicy and “its impact on the pessimistic worldview that Hudson advocates.” Second, she “raises several questions about Hudson’s proposal that obedience is the key to unlocking happiness and well-being” (e.g., whether those who have cultivated obedience are in fact happier?).

Anderson concludes:

Suppose we grant that cultivating the virtue of obedience is a metaphorical ‘primer’ for the paint colors of well-being to display themselves more vividly. If it seems to us that in those who—to the best of our knowledge—have cultivated the virtue of obedience, the colors still don’t show all that vividly, what should we think? Are those who cultivate obedience only flourishing slightly more by comparison with those who lack obedience? It is unclear to what extent Hudson thinks we can expect to flourish on this earth even if we manage to cultivate the virtue of obedience. But it’s difficult to judge the thesis of the book—that obedience is the key to flourishing—without a better appreciation of what Hudson thinks about the prospects of the obedient flourishing now.

Theologian Olli-Pekka Vainio (Helsinki) also contributes to the book symposia, along with a reply from Hudson.

2023 EPS SESSION AT CENTRAL DIVISION OF THE APA

The Evangelical Philosophical Society will host the following session at the 2023 Meeting of the Central Division of the American Philosophical Association (February 22-25, 2023; Denver, CO)

Date and Time: TBD.

Panel Discussion Theme: “Evangelical Philosophy and Polarization”

Panelists:

Our panelists will be discussing the phenomenon of polarization with respect to the following questions:

  • HISTORICAL ROLE: How has evangelicalism in general, and evangelical philosophy in particular, contributed (negatively or positively) to the current polarization in American society with respect to political identification, social values (e.g., family structures, education, abortion, etc.), the urban/rural divide, poverty and wealth, and religious orientation (or whatever other axes you’d like to address)?  Where have evangelicals in general – and evangelical philosophers in particular – contributed to varieties of polarization?  Where have evangelicals in general – and evangelical philosophers in particular – contributed to defusing polarization?  Ought evangelical philosophers seek to reduce the phenomenon of polarization (and if so, along which axes of polarization)?  Or is it outside our purview of concern?  If not outside of our concern, then what are our obligations – both as evangelicals and as philosophers – in this regard?
  • SCHOLARLY RESOURCES: What scholarly resources exist in the evangelical tradition, and within evangelical philosophy in particular, to address the phenomenon of polarization?  What can those resources contribute to addressing the many axes of polarization?  How can evangelicals develop more such resources?
  • LEARNING FROM OTHER BELIEVING INTELLECTUALS: What are some differences that you see between how evangelicalism in general, and evangelical philosophy in particular, has addressed (or failed to address) issues of polarization, and how other Christian intellectual traditions have addressed these issues?  What can we learn from the approaches of other traditions?
  • FUTURE DIRECTIONS: What do you see as the current vocation of evangelical intellectuals, and of evangelical philosophers in particular, given the current polarization (along many axes) within American society?  If it is appropriate for evangelical philosophers to enter into these conversations, what ought to be our goal(s)?  What ought to be our means to achieve those goals?

See additional links for posts about EPS at APA event details.

Send Philosophia Christi Your Best Papers Today

As the editorial team of Philosophia Christi is gearing up for future issues, now would be a great time to submit your paper for consideration.

Editor Ross Inman writes the following in a recent issue of the journal:

Our continued desire is for Philosophia Christi to be a scholarly venue that showcases high level academic work in the core areas of philosophy (ethics, metaphysics, and epistemology) as well as philosophy of religion, philosophical theology, analytic theology, and philosophical apologetics. Our aim at Philosophia Christi is to help cultivate an inviting and winsome academic posture that honors the Lord Jesus Christ, while facilitating ongoing scholarly conversation about topics that bear on the philosophical and theological contours of the Christian faith.

To catch a little more of Ross’ vision on how he sees the work of Christian philosophers, enjoy this recently published, short video interview with Ross:

Learn more about the journal and do consider sending us your best paper to review for publication (guidelines). By publishing in Philosophia Christi, your content will be read by a unique readership of professional philosophers, graduate students, theologians, pastors, and worldview/apologetics educators engaged in philosophical pursuits. 

Moreover, what are you reading in philosophy that most intrigues you? Know of a recent or forthcoming philosophical book that has yet to be reviewed in the journal? Let us know! To inquire about submitting a book review to Philosophia Christi, please contact one of our book review editors in the following areas:

Humility, Pride, and Christian Virtue Theory

In 2018, Oxford University Press published Humility, Pride, and Christian Virtue Theory by Kent Dunnington. Dunnington is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Biola University.

From the publisher’s description of Humility, Pride and Christian Virtue Theory:

Humility, Pride, and Christian Virtue Theory proposes an account of humility that relies on the most radical Christian sayings about humility, especially those found in Augustine and the early monastic tradition. It argues that this was the view of humility that put Christian moral thought into decisive conflict with the best Greco-Roman moral thought. This radical Christian account of humility has been forgotten amidst contemporary efforts to clarify and retrieve the virtue of humility for secular life. Kent Dunnington shows how humility was repurposed during the early-modern era-particularly in the thought of Hobbes, Hume, and Kant-to better serve the economic and social needs of the emerging modern state. This repurposed humility insisted on a role for proper pride alongside humility, as a necessary constituent of self-esteem and a necessary motive of consistent moral action over time. Contemporary philosophical accounts of humility continue this emphasis on proper pride as a counterbalance to humility. By contrast, radical Christian humility proscribes pride altogether. Dunnington demonstrates how such a radical view need not give rise to vices of humility such as servility and pusillanimity, nor need such a view fall prey to feminist critiques of humility. But the view of humility set forth makes little sense abstracted from a specific set of doctrinal commitments peculiar to Christianity. This study argues that this is a strength rather than a weakness of the account since it displays how Christianity matters for the shape of the moral life.

Enjoy this 2015 presentation by Kent for the “Intellectual Humility Capstone Conference”:
For more on this topic, see EPS President, Mike Austin’s latest book and author interview, along with Ross Inman’s (Philosophia Christi Editor) 2017 paper, “On the Moral and Spiritual Contours of the Philosophical Life.”

Web Project: THE PHILOSOPHY OF THEOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY

The Evangelical Philosophical Society (EPS) is pleased to introduce a unique and ongoing Philosophy of Theological Anthropology project! Your contributions, readership, exploration and support are most welcomed. For more on this theme and Christian contributions to philosophy, become a subscriberfor as low as $25 per year! – to Philosophia Christi, the peer-reviewed journal of the EPS [all EPS members receive Philosophia Christi as part of their membership].

Summary of Project 

Inaugurated in 2018, The Philosophy of Theological Anthropology is an EPS web project devoted to the foundations and meta-themes of theological anthropology. Contributors seek to highlight a variety of new topics, which are at present underexplored, and fresh philosophical perspectives of older topics. This is an opportunity for philosophers and constructive theologians to explore foundational and innovative themes within theological anthropology from a philosophical perspective.

Topics of interest in this web series include areas of epistemology, metaphysics, Christology, and traditioned anthropology. We are interested in approaches that reconceive in fresh new ways the conditions and foundations for thinking about theological anthropology. This amounts to critical interrogations of commonly held assumptions in the contemporary theological literature on anthropology. We invite contributions that are extensions of previously published works as well as unique speculative pieces. 

Areas of Web Project 

The present issue will contain topics on anthropology, philosophy of mind, imago Dei [broadly conceived], with the aim toward advancing the philosophical foundations and implications of a theistic anthropology.

Current Papers

Core Project Questions

  • How should we approach the anthropos and its telos?
  • Furthermore, how might we understand human ‘selfhood’ and ‘identity’?
  • What are the benefits and liabilities of an Analytic Theology approach?
  • Analytic Theology and Christological anthropology?
  • What are the benefits and liabilities of a more Phenomenological approach to the anthropos?
  • What is the distinctive contribution of philosophy of mind/personal ontology in contemporary theological anthropology?
  • What role does or should the sciences play in our theological constructions?
  • What are the benefits of a Christological method to anthropology?
  • Christological anthropology as an organizing motif?
  • Is a Christological method sufficient for theological anthropology?
  • From the Christian tradition, what is the Good News for the anthropos and how might that shape approaches to a study of what it means to be human?
  • What role do ecclesial, theological, or philosophical traditions play in our theological construction?
  • What substantive place does reason and experience have in understanding humans?
  • What are the different religious/denominational perspectives on the nature of human beings?
  • How might spiritual features and formation of a human being shape an understanding of the nature and purpose of a human being?
  • What are the distinctive ideas within a Christian anthropology and other religious anthropologies?
  • How might theologies and philosophies of the human person shape theologies and philosophies of ‘public life’?

Find this Project Interesting? See these other EPS Web Projects


Want to Contribute to the Philosophy of Theological Anthropology Project? 

Options for contributing: reflection essays, critical responses, book reviews, exploratory essays, dialectical pieces, methodological hybrids (biblical studies to philosophy), how to communicate to the public.

Length: Shorter (e.g., 1500-2000 words) and longer papers (e.g., 6,000 words) are permitted. You are welcome to work with the Project Editors on length issues.

Suggested topics: evolution and theological anthropology, imago Dei, the metaphysics of gender and sexuality, method, Christological anthropology, religious epistemology, and human ontology.

Main Project Categories:

  1. Denominational and Traditioned Theological Anthropology
  2. Gender, Sex, and Sexuality
  3. Sociology, Ethnography, and Theological Anthropology
  4. Science, Design, and Anthropology
  5. Technology and Posthumanism
  6. Morality and Theological Anthropology
  7. Disciplines: Philosophy, Biblical Theology, Philosophical Theology, Systematic/Constructive Theology, Retrieval Theology, Social Science, Humanities (N.B. the aim of the investigation ought to impinge on philosophical-theological matters)

Submit a Proposal: Email a topic, thesis and description of the proposed paper (250 words max) to Project Editors Joshua Farris and Nathan Jacobs [see below]. They will help guide your proposal toward being a contribution of this web project.

Lead Project Editors & Coordinators:

Past Editorial Assistant: Dave Strobolakos.

Web Project Overseer: Joseph E. Gorra, Consulting Editor, Philosophia Christi.


Please consider becoming a regular annual or monthly financial partner with the Evangelical Philosophical Society in order to expand its reach, support its members, and be a credible presence of Christ-shaped philosophical interests in the academy and into the wider culture!


Web Symposium: Academic Disciplines, Faithfulness, and the Christian Scholar

What is an academic discipline? How might we think about the mission of God, the work of Christian professors and their work among the disciplines? What does it mean to think Christianly about scholarship? How might the character of a scholar shape the work of scholarship? These questions and more are addressed in this unique web symposium centered around a paper written by Paul Gould. [Readers may also be interested in an EPS interview with Gould regarding his recent book, The Outrageous Idea of the Missional Professor].

An Essay on Academic Disciplines, Faithfulness, and the Christian Scholar

by Paul Gould

This essays argues that an academic discipline is best understood as a social practice composed of guiding principles, a guiding methodology, a data set and a collective narrative (with characters, acts and various sub-stories throughout its history).

Mission takes place at the point of intersection between the dominant western stories (scientific naturalism and postmodernism) and Christianity. Within the academic discipline, these intersections are at each level: the Christian professor will utilize her own set of guiding principles and methodologies (which might or might not agree with those of the dominant story within the discipline); she will approach the data set of the discipline from her own unique point of cognitive access, which may lead her to ask a different set of questions than those who embrace the dominant story of the discipline would ask; and she will look to her own set of Christian mentors and guides within the discipline (historical and contemporary) for leadership.

As a missional professor who always has the progress of the gospel in view, she will seek “missional connections” within her academic discipline so that Christianity will be viewed as plausible and gain a hearing in the secular university and in culture. 

Scholarship and Character as a Christian Academic

by Michael Austin

This paper considers examples of how a Christian in philosophy can embrace positions within the discipline but also provide a unique and more cogent grounding for those positions. He argues that the best way of accounting for a conception of human rights based on fundamental interests can be grounded in God’s trinitarian nature. A Christian philosopher, depending on her audience, can be explicit about this ultimate grounding or she may instead produce a work of what C.S. Lewis called latent Christianity, in which the theological underpinnings exist in her mind, but are not made explicit in her argumentation.

Austin also discusses an example of how the fact that, as Gould puts it, “Christ is the source and telos of all things, including all truths that can be discovered,” can inform Christian scholarship, related to the dual nature of the Christian virtue of humility.

Finally, Austin briefly examines the importance of a robust Christian character for the Christian academic.

 
by Gregory Ganssle

The task of the Christian in the academy is complex. Paul Gould’s Essay includes some helpful conceptual tools.

The first helps us visualize the multiple implications of the fact that God is the prime reality. These implications open up the resources of the Gospel for thinking about the task of the scholar.

The second helps us give a more nuanced analysis of the contours of one’s academic discipline.

In this essay, Gregory Ganssle develop these tools to help make them more comprehensive, and, hopefully, even more applicable. 

A Perspective on Perspectival Factualism: Response to Paul Gould

by Richard Davis

Paul Gould’s Essay defends what he calls ‘Perspectival Factualism’ as the best approach for a Christian scholar to adopt towards her academic discipline. Richard Davis raises some questions for Prof. Gould’s proposal along with some alternative proposals. This paper also reflects Davis’s recent contribution in Philosophia Christi, where he [and Paul Franks] critique another form of perspectivalism. 

 

Reflection on Gould’s Model of Faith and Scholarship: Consistent, Holistic, Realistic?

by David Naugle

In this response to Paul Gould’s Essay, David Naugle mentions seven positive things he sees in his essay, including: that Gould emphasizes God’s mission and our scholarly faithfulness to it, his helpful definitions of academic disciplines, his examples of missional professors, the good Christian resources Gould uses, his boldness, and many other solid points too many to discuss.

Negatively, Naugle mentions, in summary fashion, the following points: a possible contradiction, a failure to be truly holistic in the faith-learning nexus, and finally, whether Gould’s model will lead to the transformation he seeks. Each major section is followed by summaries of various kinds.

Further Reflections on Academic Faithfulness: A Reply to Friendly Critics

by Paul Gould

In this paper, Paul Gould responds to essays by Michael Austin, Gregory Ganssle, Richard Davis, and David Naugle as they interact with his model of faith-scholarship integration as articulated in his “Essay on Academic Disciplines, Faithfulness, and the Christian Scholar.”