Comprehensive Notes on the Traditions of Philosophy of Religion
Overview
Introduces six broad traditions of philosophizing about religion across history and place, emphasizing that traditions are shaped by their Context, Ends, Methods, and Content (CEMC).
Aims to develop a global-critical approach, recognizing there's no single “natural” content for the discipline.
A tradition of philosophy of religion involves:
Groups inheriting similar religious practices, ideas, and institutions.
Enacting philosophy of religion to similar ends, in similar ways, about similar contents.
Passing down these practices through social institutions.
The four analytic components are: Context (where/when), End (why), Method (how), Content (what).
The core analytic claim is: Context shapes end, which informs method and content, as in: Context
End
Method + Content.
In symbols: \text{Tradition} = (\text{Context}, \text{End}, \text{Method}, \text{Content})
And: \text{Content} = f(\text{Context}, \text{End}, \text{Method}) .
These four features are paired with common interrogation questions:
Context = where and when
End = why
Method = how
Content = what
Uses a journey metaphor (origin, destination, route, obstacles, sights, travelers) to structure global-critical philosophy, providing concrete categories for examining traditions.
Four Component Parts of a Tradition of Philosophizing about Religion
Context (where/when): The historical and cultural setting in which a tradition arises.
End (why): The aims or goals for philosophizing about religion in that context.
Method (how): The means used to pursue ends (e.g., philosophical logic, textual interpretation, intuitive insight, debate).
Content (what): The religious ideas or issues addressed.
Core analytic claim: Context shapes end, which informs method and content; content and methods are shaped by both cultural-historical contexts and social/personal goals.
(See Table 1.2 in source for summary).
The Six Traditions to Track in This Text
East Asian philosophy of religion: Traditions beginning in China (before the Common Era) including Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism.
South Asian philosophy of religion: Traditions on the Indian subcontinent before the Common Era, including Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and (later) Sikhism.
Mediterranean/Abrahamic philosophy of religion: Traditions beginning in the Mediterranean, influenced by Greek/Roman philosophy, including Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
African philosophy of religion: Traditions beginning in Africa before European colonization, intensifying afterward in response to European philosophy and religion.
Indigenous American philosophy of religion: Traditions beginning in the Americas before European colonization, intensifying after contact.
European/Academic philosophy of religion: Traditions beginning in Enlightenment Europe (largely Christian), disseminated globally through Western scholarship and modern academia.
II. European/Academic Philosophy of Religion During and After the European Enlightenment
Timeframe: Early 17th century through the mid-19th century.
Core Context:
Reason as primary authority; rise of scientific revolution and confidence in scientific method.
Public-private divide: religion becomes privatized and belief-focused; church/state separation emerges; public life becomes secular.
Method and Content shaped by privatization and belief-ification:
Method: Religious beliefs are interrogated from a Western philosophical perspective; appeals to authority are ruled out; emphasis on proofs and rational justification; alignment with science is sought.
Content: “Lowest common denominator religion” – beliefs common across European traditions (e.g., God’s nature/existence, immortality of the soul, ethics, and the problem of evil). Religious experience and pluralism gain prominence as topics.
Analytic vs Continental developments:
Analytic tradition: Emphasizes logic, clarity, and argumentation.
Continental philosophy of religion (since the 1970s): Offers an alternative, focusing on experiential intuition and interpretation (phenomenology, hermeneutics).
Feminist and postcolonial critiques: In the latter half of the 20th century, these perspectives critique patriarchal religious structures and highlight the voices of marginalized groups in religious life.
Key takeaway: Changing sociopolitical contexts reshape aims, methods, and contents of Western philosophy of religion, illustrating the broader claim that context and end drive method and content.
III. Antecedents to the European Enlightenment Tradition: Greco-Roman and Abrahamic Philosophy of Religion
The Enlightenment did not arise in isolation; its roots trace to ancient Greek and Roman philosophy and medieval Jewish, Christian, and Islamic thought.
Ancient Greek influences:
Plato: The Good as an overarching form beyond existing things; Timaeus features a Demiurge who fashions the cosmos.
Aristotle: The Unmoved Mover (telos of the cosmos) as the ultimate source; arguments from motion and from cause-and-effect chains toward a necessary being. Aristotle’s God is not a creator but a sustaining force that guarantees the cosmos’ order.
Medieval reception of Aristotle:
Islamic philosophy (falṣafa) and kalām: Engage Aristotle’s proofs for God. Debates persist about which proofs work in different contexts.
Jewish and Christian thinkers (Maimonides, Aquinas, Anselm): Integrate Aristotelian ideas into Christian and Jewish theology.
Aquinas: Provides five Aristotelian-inspired ways to prove God’s existence.
Anselm: Offers ontological arguments.
Free will and determinism in Rome and beyond:
Stoicism: God (theos) immanent in the cosmos, directed by logos; the question of free will arises from the tension between divine rational order and human agency.
Christian interpretation (Paul, Augustine): Freedom to choose versus determinism, with original sin complicating human agency but redeemable through grace.
Islamic debates: Contrast Muʿtazilites (emphasizing human free will for moral responsibility) with Ashʿarites (kasb: acquisition) to reconcile divine omnipotence with human accountability.
Modern relevance: These medieval and classical debates foreshadow current discussions, but contemporary philosophy often uses cognitive science and modern psychology to understand free will and decision making.
IV. Philosophy of Religion Outside “Western” Traditions
A. Philosophy of Religion in South Asia
Terminology: Before colonial encounters, the terms religion and philosophy did not map neatly onto Sanskrit terms dharma (duty/truth/reality) and darśana (philosophical views).
Separation: No tight separation between religion and philosophy; many darśana engage religious topics alongside philosophical ones.
Schools:
Six āstika (orthodox) schools: Generally acknowledge the authority of the Vedas; include Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika, Sāṃkhya, Yoga, Mīmāṃsā, and Vedānta.
Nāstika (unorthodox) groups: Reject Vedas or emphasize other sources; include Cārvāka (Lokāyata), Jainism, and Buddhism.
Key Schools and Concepts:
Nyāya: Knowledge through valid sources (pramāṇa) such as perception, inference, testimony.
Vaiśeṣika: Atomistic theory with nine substances and six objects of experience.
Sāṃkhya & Yoga: Dualism of puruṣa and prakṛti; Yoga emphasizes techniques to liberate the self.
Mīmāṃsā: Ritual efficacy and Vedic interpretation.
Vedānta: Focuses on the relationship between Ātman and Brahman (the ultimate reality).
Ātman/Brahman debates:
Advaita Vedānta (Śaṅkara) advocates nondualism.
Viṣṇu or Ramānuja’s qualified nondualism.
Madhva’s dualism.
Other schools debate the existence of a first cause or ultimate reality.
Cārvāka (Lokāyata): Materialist, denies non-material soul and release; critiques inferential reasoning.
Jainism: Posits a plurality of souls and cosmology without a permanent ultimate reality or first cause.
Buddhism: Emphasizes impermanence and typically denies an eternal soul or permanent first cause.
Central issues: Nature of reality, the soul, method for liberation, and epistemology; content often differs from Western debates but addresses similar questions.
B. Philosophy of Religion in East Asia
Terminology: Modern terms for religion and philosophy arrived late (late 19th century); native classifications existed, such as sānjiào (the three teachings) of Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism.
China’s “three teachings” differ from Western religious classifications, and Folk Religion is typically treated as a separate category.
The Three Teachings:
Confucianism (ru): Harmony of society through ritualized virtue and human-heartedness expressed in social conduct.
Daoism (Daojiao): Living in spontaneous alignment with the Dao (the Way), emphasizing naturalness and flexibility.
Buddhism (Fojiao): Emphasis on awakening, but East Asian forms emphasize inward harmony rather than metaphysical speculation; highlights Buddha-nature and more immediate enlightenment.
Relationship: The three teachings are often viewed as complementary rather than competitive, shaping a distinct East Asian approach to philosophy of religion focused on social harmony, nature, and mind.
C. Philosophy of Religion in Africa
Focus: Yorùbá philosophy of religion, chosen for its robust religious-philosophical reflection on destiny, divination, and divine order.
Core: Yorùbá religion centers on a diviner (babaláwo) who serves as the intellectual of traditional society, interpreting Ifá divination (256 odu) to discern destiny (ayànmò) before birth and address illness or misfortune.
Ifá divination: Interpretive, requiring creative and critical thinking to recite and interpret verses tied to the issue at hand.
Ends: Understanding one’s destiny, healing, and addressing social/individual misfortune; in the colonial/postcolonial era, ends expand to defend traditional philosophy against Western criticism and to participate in broader postcolonial critique.
D. Philosophy of Religion in the Americas
Case study: Lakȟóta (Sioux) philosophy of religion, focusing on the Lakȟóta/Sioux peoples (Seven Fireplaces) and their religious practices as transmitted by holy people (wičhása wakȟáŋ).
Pre-contact life: Semi-nomadic living on the Great Plains with sacred landscapes (Black Hills) and constellations of ritual specialists (holy people) who provided revelations, performed miracles, and linked weather, healing, dreams, and visions with spiritual knowledge.
Ends: Survival, weather control, healing, and navigation of the spiritual world; after contact, ends include resistance to Euro-American religious influence and defense of traditional Lakȟóta philosophy through scholarship and movement (e.g., the American Indian Movement).
Diaspora and transmission: Lakȟóta ideas persist in contemporary Native American communities and scholarship; Vine Deloria, Jr. is a key figure in bringing Lakȟóta philosophy into public discourse.
V. Categories for Global-Critical Philosophy of Religion
The book explicitly enlarges the scope beyond Western norms by offering the journey metaphor as a universal framework for global-critical philosophy of religion.
The journey metaphor provides productive categories for questioning: origin, destination, route, obstacles, sights, travelers, and interactions among travelers.
Table 1.5 (Questions about the Journey of the Self): Lists fundamental questions such as: Who am I? Where do I come from? Where am I going? How do I get there? What obstacles are in my way? These questions can be retasked with a subjunctive rider (“if any/anything”) to reflect different ontologies.
Table 1.6: Extends the journey metaphor to the cosmos (the journey of the universe): What is the cosmos? Where does it come from? Where is it going? How does it function? What obstacles are in the way? This helps generate productive questions for global philosophy of religion without privileging Abrahamic categories.
The author emphasizes a potential “null result”: some traditions may posit no origin or end for the cosmos, or no ultimate self-soul, which challenges the assumption that origins/endpoints are necessary features of every cosmology.
VI. And What About You?
A reflective prompt asking readers to examine the contexts and ends of their own philosophy of religion and how those shape method and content.
Encourages consideration of religious diversity, conflict, and innovation in one’s own locale and the implications for one’s philosophical aims.
Questions for Discussion (summary)
Choose one of the six traditions; explain how context shapes end and how that shapes method and content.
Sketch the content of two or more traditions; identify similarities and differences and explain them.
Use a global-critical framework (one of the ten categories) to analyze familiar religious philosophies; assess which questions are easy or difficult to answer and why.
Reflect on how your own cultural-historical context informs your philosophy of religion, and how context shapes its ends, methods, and content.
Primary and Scholarly Sources (illustrative selections)
East Asia: Graham, A. C. Disputers of the Tao; Schwartz, The World of Thought in Ancient China.
European/Academic: Collins, The Emergence of Philosophy of Religion; Oppy & Trakakis, The History of Western Philosophy of Religion; Westphal, “The Emergence of Modern Philosophy of Religion”; Lakȟóta materials by Powers and co-authors; Lakota religious traditions in Jones’s Encyclopedia entry.
Mediterranean/Abrahamic: Foltz (ed.), Medieval Philosophy: A Multicultural Reader; Marenbon, Medieval Philosophy: An Historical and Philosophical Introduction.
South Asia: Gupta, An Introduction to Indian Philosophy; Matilal, The Character of Logic in India.
Yorùbá: Akinwande Abíbímbi; Hallen (references listed in the primary sources section).
Africa (general): Barry Hallen, A Short History of African Philosophy.
Key Terms and Figures to Remember
Four components: Context, End, Method, Content.
The journey metaphor and its constituent parts: origin, destination, route, obstacles, sights, traveler interactions.
Famous figures and terms: Plato (the Good), Aristotle (Unmoved Mover), Aquinas (Five Ways), Anselm (ontological argument), Maimonides (medieval Jewish philosophy), Augustine (original sin and freedom), Muʿtazilites and Ashʿarites (Islamic debates on free will), Konfucius (Kongzi), Mencius, Laozi, Zhuangzi, Daodejing, Rigveda and Vedānta schools; Cārvāka; Jainism; Buddhism; Ifá and Babaláwo; Lakȟóta holy people; Vine Deloria, Jr.
Notes on Use
The chapter encourages a flexible, globally inclusive approach to philosophy of religion, urging readers to understand that what counts as religious-philosophical reflection varies by culture and historical period.
The content is designed to be revisited chapter by chapter; each chapter investigates a tradition in depth while maintaining awareness of cross-tradition connections and divergences.
The “null result” concept is especially important for recognizing that some cosmologies may not posit an origin or end, which can shift the way questions about cosmology are framed in different traditions.