It comes a little late, but congratulations to Professor Linda Trinkaus Zagzebski of the University of Oklahoma who has been awarded the Phi Beta Kappa, Romanell Professorship in Philosophy for 2005-2006. The professorship is presented annually to a philosophy scholar in recognition of distinguished achievement and the scholar's past or potential contribution to public understanding of philosophy. Recent recipients include Stanley Cavell, Alvin Goldman, and Harry Frankfurt. Recipients are expected to present three open lectures at their institutions. Zagzebski has said the lectures will surround the general theme of "Religious Diversity" with lectures on Religious Belief: Public Issue or Private Business, The Ethics of Action and Belief, and Exemplarism and the Resolution of Conflict.

Update: The lectures will be September 26, 28, and 30 from 4-6pm in the OU Memorial Union. The titles are: The Admirable Life and the Desirable Life, The Desirable LIfe and the Ethics of Belief and Assertion, The Ethics of Belief and the Diversity of Religions.

Frontpage Magazine has an interview with conservative philosopher John Kekes on his new book The Roots of Evil. Kekes tripartite evil mantra states that evil is "serious excessive harm caused by actions, malevolent motivation of the evildoer, and the lack of morally acceptable excuse for the actions." I say mantra because he repeats this about four times in the interview. What is of interest in the interview is that Kekes seems to get at least one fact about Christianity seriously wrong. Here is Kekes on the Christian/Enlightenment explanation of evil.

The explanation of evil inspired by Christianity and the Enlightenment attempt to explain evil by explaining it away. They refuse to face the fact that the motive to do evil is a basic component of human psychology. Both Christian and Enlightenment thinkers assume that the good is primary and evil is some sort of interference with the good. The explanation they seek is of the nature and cause of the interference with the good. Both are naive and deny the facts of life. The first requirement of an adequate response to evil is to face the facts about it, not to try to explain them away as exceptional.

Now I'm not qualified to speak to the Enlightenment claim, but there is a major strand of Christianity that firmly affirms that man is fallen, totally depraved, and at least evil to some degree. To affirm that the good is primary (because it issues from God) isn't to deny that evil is a basic component of human nature or put a gloss on the face of evil. So I think Kekes is plainly wrong here.

The conversation moves on to the problem of evil with Kekes saying some pretty controversial stuff, but this snip takes the cake:

if we do not have answers to these mysteries [Problem of Evil], then we do not know that God exists

Now I think there are some pretty good responses to various forms of the problem of evil. Yet suppose that theists didn't have a good answer. Would not having an answer to the problem of evil mean that we don't know that God exists? I'll grant that the problem of evil is fairly thorny, but I'm not sure that it is enough to totally undermine belief in the existence of God given various arguments and reasons for believing that God does exists. I could see why one might think it lowers the probability of God actually existing, or one might think that some part of our conception of God is amiss. Yet these are not reasons to simply toss up ones hands in surrender.

Philosophers' Carnival XVI is at Dinner Table Donts. Prosblogion is represented by Patrick's Theodical Individualism.

The next Philosophers' Carnival is coming up this Friday. As usual, submissions instructions are here.

New College Madison, The Society of Christian Philosophers Midwest Region, University of Wisconsin: Philosophy Department, and Department of Liberal Studies and the Arts Present:

The Christian Worldview: Analysis, Assessment, and Development
A Conference in Honor of Keith E. Yandell
September 15-17, 2005, Memorial Union, Madison Wisconsin

Register Online: http://www.newcollegemadison.com/register/

Lodging is available at the Madison Red Roof on 9/15 and 9/16 for $49.99 a night if you reserve your room before 8/15. If you decide to stay at the Red Roof you will need to provide the following Block #: B052UWSOCP

Philosopher Michael Ruse (FSU) offers some insightful commentary on the state of science-and-religion studies. Executive Summary: We are not as good as we could be and we'll only get better by taking science and theology head-on in a tough minded manner.

John DePoe points to a humorous Amazon book review by philosopher Timothy McGrew titled C is for Clueless. John's post generated some interesting comments that are worth a read for the more theologically minded.

There is a new book out on Michael Servetus (1509-1553) and Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772) take on the Trinity or lack thereof, Servetus, Swedenborg and the Nature of God. Though living in separate ages both men came independently to similar views rejecting the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. (My linking to this shouldn't be seen as endorsement of the views they arrive at.)

A University of Alabama at Birmingham medical student has founded a new religion called Universism. Best quote from the article "We absolutely reject absolute truth."

UPDATE: Philosopher Jonathan Bennett has added new texts to his early modern texts project. Readers will probably be most interested in the addition of Leibniz's Making the Case for God an appendix to the Theodicy.

John Davenport reviews Religion and the Liberal Polity for Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews.