David Rohr

This chapter presents the results of qualitative analysis, using NVivo software (version 10), of the responses of fifty-one philosophers of religion to the question “What is philosophy of religion?” posted at PhilosophyOfReligion.org. The core finding is that various differences of perspective within the field are correlated with whether or not the institution where a philosopher teaches is secular or requires a statement of religious faith. Beyond identifying this fault line running through the field, the chapter presents a complex portrait of contemporary North American philosophy of religion, including the diverse conceptions of the field that philosophers adhere to, how the field is understood to relate to religious studies and theology, which figures are esteemed as exemplary, what issues are most controversial, and what sort of programmatic visions for the future of philosophy of religion are presently being advocated.

From the swirling stars above, to the end-directed design of life below, to the perceptions and emotions that color the world within—as more and more phenomena prove susceptible to scientific description, explanation, prediction, and control, the naturalistic metainduction grows increasingly plausible: perhaps nature is self-enclosed, so that everything that makes a difference within the world is itself part of the world; perhaps there are no disembodied agents—neither ghosts nor gods—whose actions influence our shared day-to-day world. Because neither the expansion of science’s adequacy nor the concomitant pressure toward philosophical naturalism show signs of abating, the recent emergence of religious naturalism..

Containing ten original essays by leading philosophers and scholars of religion, this volume is an important resource for anyone interested in the complex, evolving relationship between pragmatism and philosophical naturalism, especially as this bears upon the study and practice of religion. Matthew Bagger's general introduction and his introductions to each section are important contributions in their own right, providing the historical and contextual background needed to weave the volume's disparate essays into a coherent whole. After briefly summarizing each essay, this review provides a critical response to the eclipse of "representationalism" announced in the volume's subtitle.Part 1 explores the naturalisms...

The central thesis of this essay is that the relation imagined to hold between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit corresponds quite closely with the triadic relationship that holds between object, sign, and interpretant, respectively, within C. S. Peirce’s conception of semiosis. Section 1 introduces Peirce’s conception of semiosis. Section 2 supports the main thesis through examination of descriptions of the Trinitarian relations in two classic Christian texts: The New Testament and The Catechism of the Catholic Church. Section 3 reviews two alternative explanations of this surprising correlation: Andrew Robinson’s vestigia Trinitatis explanation and a naturalistic alternative.

C.S. Peirce's "A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God" [NA] has always baffled its readers. Its publishing editor needed to ask, "[W]hat, then, precisely, is your neglected argument?", and EP 2's editors observe that "[t]his is one of Peirce's most enigmatic writings". First-time readers will likely concur with the underwhelmed theologian who told Michael Raposa that NA "ought to remain neglected". Early Peirce scholars did neglect the essay, regarding it as an "anomalous sideshow to Peirce's more important concern with the logic and methodology of science". No longer ignored, NA continues to bewilder: "N....

C. S. Peirce claimed that the pragmatic method of clarifying ideas is "nothing but a particular application of an older logical rule, 'By their fruits ye shall know them.'"1 While Jesus spoke about discriminating between true and false religious teachers, Peirce was concerned with clarifying our intellectual concepts. Peirce's pragmatism asserts that we clearly understand the meaning of a concept if we can state the potentially practical and empirical consequences that would follow from the truth of a proposition involving that concept. Robert C. Neville's semiotic and pragmatic theory of religious truth unites Jesus's and Peirce's concerns, proposing that religious truth consists in an adaptedness or fit between...

Charles S. Peirce’s semeiotic—his theory about signs, reference, interpretation, meaning, and communication—is applicable with illuminating results to innumerable processes of semeiosis or sign interpretation. Robert C. Neville is the first deep student of Peirce’s semeiotic to have systematically applied that theory to the analysis and theory of theological signs, interpretation, and truth—hereafter, theological semeiotic. The result is easily the deepest and richest theological semeiotic currently available. Being the best, it is also most worthy of critique. In this essay, I argue that Neville misinterprets Peirce’s concept of an index, conceiving an index in terms of the interpreter-object rather than...

J. Caleb Clanton’s excellent new book is a must read for scholars studying the “classical” American philosophical tradition and for philosophers of religion more generally. In each of the six main chapters, Clanton reconstructs and assesses an argument in the philosophy of religion made by one philosophers that belong to the classic American tradition. Clanton’s approach is analytical and precise but not overly technical. His careful reconstructions of each argument constitute an invaluable scholarly contribution, and his insightful criticisms of each argument warrant the close attention of his philosophical peers. Clearly, Clanton’s book is the fruit of long hours spent “thinking with” the...

This essay employs Charles Peirce’s triadic semiotics in order to develop a biosemiotic theory of life that is capable of illuminating the function of information in living systems. Specifically, I argue that the relationship between biological information structures , selecting environments, and the adapted bodily processes of living organisms is aptly modelled by the irreducibly triadic relationship between Peirce’s sign, object, and interpretant, respectively. In each instance of information-based semiosis, the information structure is a complex informational sign that represents the informational object ; and the bodily, behavioral, mental, or intellectual processes that are organized by the informational sign to more or less accurately interpret the present environment constitute a complex informational interpretant—a living, interpreting organism. The essay begins by discussing the precise sense in which this biosemiotic theory is based upon Charles Peirce’s semiotic theory. Next, the theory is developed at length in relation to genetic information structures. Finally, I present a brief outline of how the theory applies to neural and linguistic information structures. The essay concludes with a reflection upon the anti-reductionist implications of the theory