Academia & Ecclesia

“But none of us like to believe that things that happen to us are coincidences. We’re all hard-wired to believe that things that happen to us are significant.” Lawrence Krauss (Theoretical Physicist / Anti-theist) As a Christian who constantly and critically examines one’s beliefs (religious ones in particular), I always find myself living in the midst of what I call "doxastic dilemmas". The term "doxastic" has something to do with belief. A doxastic dilemma can refer to a case where an agent has to make a profoundly perplexing choice between two contradictory beliefs that appear to represent two equally possible states of affairs. For instance, as a Christian, I believe that God elects, for reasons utterly unknown to humans, some humans to serve God in the midst of an ungodly world. The Bible abounds in stories about the heroes of faith who, supposedly, had personal experiences of God’s special providence. As a matter of fact, I also have my own experiences of

"Being a Christian philosopher is a distinctive kind of missionary work. The proximate goal is not the personal conversion of die-hard secularists for whom belief in God is not a live option. It is rather to expose and dislodge anti-religious prejudice and to foster understanding. Understanding philosophical problems involves appreciating the costs and benefits of alternative solutions. The theoretical map is not complete without Christian options. The role of the Christian philosopher is to develop Christian approaches in, say, ethics and metaphysics and philosophy of mind with such rigor and detail as to exhibit their coherence, explanatory power, and fruitfulness. The aim is to show that Christian theories are strong enough to be viable competitors in the theoretical market-place. Such work is a form of service to the Truth, and for that very reason is good for professional philosophy" Source:  http://www.epsociety.org/userfiles/art-AdamsM%20(Ch

http://www.businessinsider.com/successful-philosophy-majors-2014-1?op=1 You can also read the following online articles: http://www.businessinsider.com/successful-liberal-arts-majors-2012-12?op=1 http://www.businessinsider.com/11-reasons-to-major-in-the-humanities-2013-6

http://stanfordpress.typepad.com/blog/2014/07/views-on-gaza-a-blog-series.html

Philosophy has been recently under attack by popular scientists. Here are some scientists who defend philosophy: http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2014/06/23/physicists-should-stop-saying-silly-things -about-philosophy/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/massimo-pigliucci/neil-degrasse-tyson-and-the-value-of-philosophy_b_5330216.html http://www.rotman.uwo.ca/2014/why-talk-to-philosophers-part-ii/ http://www.rotman.uwo.ca/2014/why-talk-to-philosophers-part-iii/ http://www.rotman.uwo.ca/2014/why-talk-to-philosophers-part-iv/ http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2014/07/22/physicist-george-ellis-knocks-physicists -for-knocking- philosophy-free-will/ http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2014/08/21/quantum-gravity-expert-says-philosophical -superficiality-has-harmed-physics/

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133.html#.U4wiY8u9KSO

http://io9.com/scientists-need-philosophers-to-solve-this-problem-1578428283

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/05/why-philosophy-majors-rule_n_4891404.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false

According to Steven Pinker (Harvard psychologist), "... the acquisition of knowledge is hard. The world does not go out of its way to reveal its workings, and even if it did, our minds are prone to illusions, fallacies, and superstitions. Most of the traditional causes of belief—faith, revelation, dogma, authority, charisma, conventional wisdom, the invigorating glow of subjective certainty—are generators of error and should be dismissed as sources of knowledge. To understand the world, we must cultivate workarounds for our cognitive limitations, including skepticism, open debate, formal precision, and empirical tests, often requiring feats of ingenuity. Any movement that calls itself “scientific” but fails to nurture opportunities for the falsification of its own beliefs (most obviously when it murders or imprisons the people who disagree with it) is not a scientific movement."

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O9zxCN8Jst0&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DO9zxCN8Jst0

Here's an interesting dialogue on physics, philosophy, and religion between Hans Halvorson (Princeton philosopher / Christian) and Sean Carroll (CalTech physicist / atheist): http://veritas.org/campuses/california-institute-technology/

I am not a Nazarene, but I received my undergraduate degree from a Nazarene college. There's something admirable about how the Nazarene Church as a denomination is responding to the theory of evolution. It should serve as a model for other evangelical denominations. http://www.exploringevolution.com/

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/01/22/see-how-liberal-arts-grads-really-fare-report-examines-long-term-data

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-leiter/why-philosophy-of-law-has_b_4606305.html