New Waves in Philosophy of Religion
November 22, 2008 — 15:46

Author: Yujin Nagasawa  Category: Books of Interest  Comments: 3

Hi everyone. This is my first post on the Prosblogion. Thank you Matthew for letting me join this exciting group.
I just received from Palgrave Macmillan a copy of New Waves in Philosophy of Religion, an anthology that I edited with Erik Wielenberg.
Here is what we say in the introduction: “As part of the New Waves in Philosophy series, this volume aims to gather together papers written by some of the best philosophers of religion of the new generation. The quantifier ‘some’ is important here because we do not claim to have collected papers by all the best philosophers of religion of the new generation. The impossibility of such a task is a consequence of the healthy state of contemporary philosophy of religion.”

Some of the editors of the New Waves volumes have organised conferences to launch their volumes. I am organising a conference on the concept of God and the cognitive science of religion at Birmingham, UK in June 2009 (with the generous support of Oxford and the Templeton Foundation) and planning to introduce our volume there. At the conference there will be such new waves as Klaas Kraay, David Efird and T. J. Mawson as well as Ricahrd Swinburne and Graham Oppy. I will post details of the conference and a call for papers as soon as possible.
The table of contents is as follows:
Yujin Nagasawa (University of Birmingham, UK) and Erik J. Wielenberg (DePauw University, USA)
Chapter 1: A New Definition of ‘Omnipotence’ in Terms of Sets
Daniel J. Hill (University of Liverpool, UK)
Chapter 2: Can God Choose a World at Random?
Klaas J. Kraay (Ryerson University, Canada)
Chapter 3: Why is there Anything at All?
T. J. Mawson (Oxford University, UK)
Chapter 4: Programs, Bugs, DNA and a Design Argument
Alexander R. Pruss (Georgetown University, USA)
Chapter 5: The ‘Why Design?’ Question
Neil A. Manson (University of Mississippi, USA)
Chapter 6: Divine Command Theory and the Semantics of Quantified Modal Logic
David Efird (University of York, UK)
Chapter 7: Divine Desire Theory and Obligation
Christian B. Miller (Wake Forest University, USA)
Chapter 8: The Puzzle of Prayers of Thanksgiving and Praise
Daniel Howard-Snyder (Western Washington University, USA)
Chapter 9: A Participatory Model of the Atonement
Tim Bayne (University of Oxford, UK) and Greg Restall (University of Melbourne, Australia)
Chapter 10: Basic Human Worth: Religious and Secular Perspectives
Christopher J. Eberle (United States Naval Academy, USA)
Chapter 11: Imperfection as Sufficient for a Meaningful Life: How Much is Enough?
Thaddeus Metz (University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa)

  • USNA Ancient

    It would be interesting to know the religious backgrounds and current practice of the individuals referenced in the book and also to be referenced/cited in the blog … maybe I missed something, being new here !
    I did notice the absence of Sam Harris and Hitchens; is that to be taken that their philosophies are ignored here ?
    I am hoping to find a reasoned, complete, dispassionate, and respectful discussion of all aspects [except the in-your-face, believe-as-I-believe-or go-to-hell, far-wrong, wing-nut moral majority [neither] evangelicals … so much for dispassionate], including secular humanism, agnosticism and atheism, as well as the major philosophies.

    November 22, 2008 — 19:05
  • Matthew Mullins

    USNA Ancient,
    Prosblogion is geared towards professional philosophers and as such I suspect that most will think that the religious backgrounds of the individuals writing for the book, and indeed for those on this blog, are largely irrelevant to the arguments that are made. You aren’t likely to find much discussion of Harris or Hitchens around here as neither individuals are professional philosophers. Being popular writers it might be a bit unfair to hold them to higher argumentative standards expected of philosophers.

    November 23, 2008 — 12:05
  • Kevin Timpe

    Another reason you won’t find much discussion of Harris and Hitchens here: we’re philosophers, and thus intersted in arguments; alas, neither Harrit nor Hitchens offer much in that regard.

    November 24, 2008 — 1:10