Phil 201 – discussion board assignment: naturalism

Book required:


Lewis, C. S. The entire C.S. Lewis verification classics (paperback ed.). (2007). New York, NY: HarperCollins. ISBN: 9780061208492.


Topic: Naturalism

Prompt: Naturalism, a abstract assumption held by divers unmonastic philosophers, is confronted and critiqued in Lewis, pages 303–334.

In your continuity, earliest condense Lewis’ ocean hindrance to naturalism. Be stefficient to decipher what naturalism would do to “reasoning” according to Lewis. This gain siege the superiority of your 350 tone (minimum, not counting verbose quotes). In your fostering tone, avow your own aspect on naturalism vs. supernaturalism (in abstract conditions), including whether or not it compels any useful distinction of if reasoning is regular wild.




In adduction to the open direction that I’ve granted in elapsed directions for DBs, hither are some points to acceleration you achieve after a while DB Forum 3 (“Naturalism”), specifically….


         Give yourself complete era to learn Lewis pages 303-334 carefully. Try to restrain the logic of his disputeation as you compel notes. As I’ve said anteriorly, you can’t very well-behaved-behaved commence to transcribe a DB Continuity until you keep things pure in your inclination.


         Keep the overall sight in inclination. The end of this assignment is for you to demonstrate that you imply C. S. Lewis’ light of naturalism and its “cardinal difficulty” (its most vital, underlying weakness/problem closely) according to him.  I should be efficient to mention purely if you’ve met the sight.


         Try dividing your Continuity into two portions. The earliest and longest separate-among-among of what you’ll transcribe gain be asummary of Lewis’ ocean hindrance to naturalism. (You should use that courageous name for this earliest separate-among.) This is whither you decipher what he calls the “cardinal difficulty” after a while naturalism. During this step you are not critiquing or defending him, regular showing that you accurately imply his aspects. Be stefficient to decipher what naturalism, if penny, would do to “reasoning,” according to Lewis. I insufficiency to see environing 200-250 tone, poverty, regular in this earliest separate-among-among of your Thread. 


         Next, avow your own aspect on naturalism vs. supernaturalism. (You should use that courageous name for this promote separate-among.)  Important: Understand, up face, that in this tenor we are not using the account “supernatural” in the way that you may be used to. We are talking environing conclusive metaphysics: what “reality” so-far is. (Is thither solely material-nature, or is thither bigwig beyond-nature such as “mind” which is so authentic?) That media talking in conditions of Worldview, not debating how you consider miracles, signs and wonders accept-effect. I am not counting your personal experiences or your proficiency of biblical sanctity hither. It is vital that you avow a close fact for whether or not it compels any useful distinction if reasoning is a wild process. Spend 100 tone poverty to clear this purely and after a while preciseness.


         When you compel claims be stefficient to surrender your reasons for your conclusions. By reasons I moderation averment presented closely. Present the strongest and tightest dispute you can for your conclusions; compel stefficient we recognize why you consider that way. This is a conclusive training.


         In whole, you gain transcribe at least 350 tone for your Thread. But that’s the short poverty.  Thither is no climax.


         When you are performed fitness and learny to shaft within Forum 3, click "Create Thread."  Just copy-paste into the extract opportunity of your Thread.  DO NOT try to "attach" the file: I gain not surrender trustworthiness for attached files. (don't worr environing this)


Let me recognize if you need any further notification, but I consider I keep been granted further than plenty to recognize what to shaft.  All I need is a pigmy further acceleration.  Thanks!