USUPhilosophy

While most secularists take the establishment clause to mean that religion should not interfere with government, read in the context of the whole amendment it should be read to mean that government should not interfere in the affairs of religion (just as govt should not interfere in the affairs of free spech, the press, the right to assemble or petition).

Well, the buzz in Catholic circles is that the Obama administration is working behind the scenes to quiet Catholic bishops regarding the abortion issue.  In particular, it concerns ArchBishop Burke and others who have commented on whether or not Kathleen Sebelius (Obama nominee for Health and Human Services) is fit to take the Eucharist.  The rumor is that the Obama administration is pressuring the Holy See to silence these outspoken bishops, or at least pressuring the See to distance itself from their remarks.

Now, you might think it is silly for Catholics to argue that some Catholics ought not take the Eucharist because of their political views (support for abortion).  But whether that is silly or not is not the issue.  The Catholic Church is free to be silly if it wants.  The issue is whether or not the federal govt should be meddling in the internal affairs of a religion for political ends (namely, to buttress support for Obama with Catholics by downplaying the pro-abortion stance of his nominees).

My view: The Church has every right to butt its head into government affairs – it is a free marketplace of ideas and any religious or non-religious point of view has an equal claim to participate in that marketplace.  But the govt has absolutely no business (up front or behind the scenes) in trying to quiet certain voices within that public square.  THAT is the real meaning of the First Amendment.

Here is a review of David Hart’s new book: ‘Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and its Fashionable Enemies’.  

Hart has another article (cited in this one) in First Things from a few years ago that hammers away at Dennett.

I am increasingly moving in the direction of the First Things editors in not taking New Atheism all that seriously as a philosophical point of view (though it is certainly a cultural phenomenon).  As the article points out, serious atheists like Nz are the ones we theists should be engaging.  So even though I am posting this, I don’t plan on getting sucked into a big debate about New Atheism.  I find it, frankly, utterly uninteresting and completely incapable of taking up in a serious way the lived human question (something Nz really tries to do).

Several of our students will be presenting at the upcoming UVU philosophy conference, and the keynote address for the conference will be given by our Prof. Huenemann (on Nz).  The conference is April 8th (Wed) at UVU and goes from 8am to 6pm.  

I am posting this so that students who are presenting or students that are interested in attending can use this blog to organize carpooling.  As far as I know, the exact location of the conference sessions on UVU’s campus is not yet determined, someone please post that info here once you get it. 

See the Onion report here.

In the coming weeks many philosophy majors will be presenting papers either at our own LPSC colloquium or at the UVU philosophy conference. Since many of you haven’t presented papers before, I thought it might be helpful to offer some pointers and tips.

1. You will need to find out how much time you have for your presentation, and how much of that time will be set aside for questions and discussion. A typical amount of time is something like 15 or 20 minutes for presentation, plus 5 or 10 minutes for discussion.

2. The next thing to determine is whether you would be comfortable informally presenting your paper, or whether you want to read it aloud. If you think you’ll be nervous, it’s somewhat easier to read your paper aloud. Then you won’t get flustered or confused or leave out anything. But if you’re comfortable and confident, you might prefer the looseness and spontaneity of an informal presentation.

3. If you are reading, practice. It typically takes about 2 minutes to read a page. You want to be sure to read slowly enough that the audience can follow what you are saying. You might even want to rewrite your paper so that it is more easily digested by a listening audience. You may want to prepare handouts with an outline, or key passages you’re analyzing, or arguments, or diagrams, if you think it will help your listeners understand what you’re saying. You may want handouts also if you are not reading.

4. Be loud and clear. No one likes listening to a mumbler.

5. When it comes to questions, you might hear one that you don’t know how to answer. Then you should say, “That’s a good question. I don’t know how to answer it. Does anyone have any ideas?” You won’t look like a fool (unless it’s a simple question that you obviously should have already considered.) You will look like someone who is willing to learn.

Others may have other pointers or tips. Please share!