Phil 264: Faith and Reason304 Malloy 631-7327 E-mail: afreddos@nd.edu Home page: http://www.nd.edu/~afreddos
Purpose of Course: The purpose of this seminar is fourfold: (i) to show that the fundamentals of Christian faith and morals constitute a comprehensive 'philosophical system'--consisting of both a metaphysical worldview and a moral vision--which can plausibly be seen as the fulfillment of the search for wisdom initiated by the great classical philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle; (ii) to lay out the main elements of this comprehensive worldview; (iii) to investigate the question of whether it is reasonable or instead foolish to embrace this comprehensive worldview, especially given that many of its key elements seem to be in direct conflict with some of the most cherished presuppositions of both liberal 'modernist' culture and certain 'post-modern' critiques of that culture; (iv) to broach the stronger claim that the Christian worldview is in fact preferable to the available alternatives. Texts:
C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (MacMillan Publishing Co.) St. Augustine, Confessions (Hackett) (other translations acceptable) Pope John Paul II, Fides et Ratio (Pauline Books) Pope John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor (Pauline Books) Audio tape: "Contraception, Why Not?" by Janet Smith (obtain for free (!) from instructor) Handouts available from the Phil 264 web site. Recommended Resource: Catechism of the Catholic Church Requirements:
Exams. There will be two exams, one on October 17 and the final on the dates scheduled by the registrar; each will count for 25% of the course grade. Term Paper. You are required to write a 10-15 page paper, worth 40% of the course grade. A 2-3 page proposal, plus outline, is to be submitted for approval on or before November 14, the paper itself is to be handed in on or before the last class day, December 10. See below for more details. Tentative outline: I. Introduction to Faith and Reason (For an outline of this section,
download "An Introduction to Faith and Reason")
Pope John Paul II, Fides et Ratio, ## 1-15 St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles I, chaps. 1-3 (download) Background reading: Lewis, Mere Christianity, Book II, "What Christians Believe" "The Necessity for Revelation: A Primer on Summa Contra Gentles 1, chaps. 1-9" (download) 9/1 & 9/3: The nature of
Christian faith St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles I, chaps. 4-8 (download) Pope John Paul II, Fides et Ratio, ## 24-48. (For extra help you should download the document "Chesterton's Orthodoxy".)
Chesterton, Orthodoxy, chaps. 1 & 2, 13-34
Chesterton, Orthodoxy, chap. 3, 35-50 Bertrand Russell, "A Free Man's Worship" (download) Pope John Paul II, Fides et Ratio, ## 49-63 9/19 & 9/22: The ethics
of elfland 9/24 & 9/26: The flag
of the world 9/29 & 10/1: The paradoxes
of Christianity 10/3: The
eternal revolution 10/6 & 10/8: The romance of orthodoxy 10/10 & 10/13: Authority and the adventurer 10/15: Jesus in the Gospels: gentle, with lips of
thunder III. The Good: The Outlines of Christian Morality
Pope John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, ## 6-27 "Christian Moral Theory" (download) John Paul Sartre, "Existentialism and Humanism" (download) Background reading: Lewis, Mere Christianity, Book III, chap. 1 11/5 & 11/7 & 11/10: Freedom,
conscience, and the moral law 11/12 & 11/14 & 11/17: The theological
virtues, the moral virtues, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit Background reading: 11/19 & 11/21 & 11/24 & 11/26: Christian
marriage
as a sacrament (For extra help you should download the document "Augustine's Confessions".)
Augustine, Confessions, Books 1-3, 1-47 12/3: Ages 17-29: Manicheanism and Sacred Scripture 12/5: Ages 29-30: Ambrose, skepticism, and Platonism 12/8: Age 31: Intellectual obstacles gone, but .... 12/10: Post-conversion jubilation and contrition
THE TERM PAPER: The main project for this course is a 10-15 page paper which is to be submitted on or before the last class day (December 10); a 2-3 page proposal is due on or before November 14. In what follows I will try to give you some clear indication of what I am looking for in both the paper and the proposal. I. Comments about the paper: a. The paper is meant to be a 'philosophical' paper rather than a 'research' paper. That is, I am mainly interested in having you articulate a particular claim or set of claims in an intellectually respectable manner. Of course, part of a philosophical paper as just characterized might consist in the careful exposition of some view for the purpose of illustrating or criticizing that view or, alternatively, for the purpose of defending that view against objections. So in this sense some research may be called for. b. The topic of the paper should be connected in some fairly recognizable way with our readings and discussions. I do not mean to be too restrictive in this regard. You are certainly free to draw upon other material concerning faith and reason which you are already familiar with, and you are especially free to draw upon other works by the authors we will be discussing in class. However, the burden is upon you to show how the topic you wish to explore is appropriate for the course. Moreover, the topic should not be too broad, e.g., what Chesterton has to say about Christianity. Rather, it should be a manageable topic and one which will allow you to formulate specific claims or raise specific objections. This, of course, is easier said than done, but I am here to help you do it. c. The paper is a fairly long one, and so you will have to plan it carefully. I expect the paper to move forward at well-marked junctures instead of merely talking around one or another point in order to fill space. (I especially do not want a paper consisting primarily of loosely connected observations about some topic.) I expect that for any thesis or set of theses you wish to articulate, you will identify various points at which your claims are contestable and try to formulate objections to your view that are as cogent as you can make them. I expect you then to take your best shot at refuting those objections. Further, every paper must begin with a brief introduction that tells the reader exactly what you mean to do in the paper and how each section of the paper is related in general to the defense of your thesis. d. I expect the paper to be stylistically and grammatically beyond reproach. I will take off for sloppy sentence-structure, misspellings, dangling participles, etc. Proofreading is absolutely essential. II. Comments about the proposal: a. The proposal should contain two parts, viz., a narrative and an outline. The narrative should be a two-page (or so) description of the purpose of your paper and of the steps by which you will accomplish it. In order to write this sort of narrative you must already have a fairly detailed idea of what you want to do and the series of steps by which you propose to do it. In general, your strategy must be to construct a logical sequence of steps which will correspond to the main divisions of the paper. Here is one possible example of what I have in mind: (i) exposition of a given author's view on such-and-such, (ii) three criticisms, (iii) objections to the criticisms, (iv) reply to the objections. Another might be to give a careful and orderly exposition of a rather complicated thesis. There are other possibilities as well; the main thing is to order your paper in a coherent and logical sequence. b. The outline that accompanies the narrative should make graphically clear the main divisions and subdivisions in the text. This outline should include more than just the three or four main headings; I want to see some subheadings within each of those main divisions, so that I will have a reasonably clear idea of how the paper is supposed to progress. Note: I encourage you to consult with me before the proposal deadline. |