Customer Reviews

Philosophy of Religion: An Anthology

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This book, unlike Pojman's introductory-level "Philosophical Traditions", is not for the beginner. It relies almost exclusively on primary sources, which are mostly unabridged, unfiltered, and only briefly summarized.

Some readers will find this a good reason to stay away from it; for me, as for any undergraduate who is serious enough about philosophy, it is a big plus. It certainly makes for a challenging read. Certain pieces by Alston, James, and especially Plantinga are extenuating tour-de-forces, particularly Plantinga's lengthy (and fascinating, regardless of one's opinion) work on warrant, Christian belief, and foundationalism.

Thankfully, this edition gives more room to issues concerning naturalism and evolutionary biology. While the choice of articles is debatable (particularly Gish), it is still a fair introduction to some essential conceptual issues that go beneath the trite and politicized "creation-evolution controversy."

Overall, a full appreciation of this anthology requires either former background in philosophy or a really good professor. I had both, so I enjoyed it at its fullest; but I cannot guarantee the same experience for everybody.

As stated the package come to my door step within three to five business days and in pretty good condition. I really enjoy the anthology and the content is great for an introduction into modern Religious Philosophy. I recommend this as a great complement for a religious studies major, or general reading. Material is best understood through group discussion.

The book is very well written but not for the fainthearted in the study of Religion or the philosophy thereof. It can be difficult reading. It is definitely not bedtime reading. It requires thought, concentration and putting aside your own beliefs and being open-minded.

Earlier editions are still easily the best Philosophy of Religion texts on the market. Rea chooses to include poorly researched sections on naturalism and the debates between evolutionary biology and creation science. Both sections include workers by popular writers such as Richard Dawkins as if they were the best defense the sciences had to offer themselves against Discovery Institute nut-jobs and then Discovery Institute Nuts like Dembski and Behe are paraded out as if they were competent and intellectually respectable. These two sections really lower the quality of what was once a fantastic philosophy of religion anthology.

Hopefully future revisions will improve the text. Until then, go with a cheaper text. They're are plenty of Phil of Religion texts on the market for half the price of this text that are now of higher quality.