view attached filesJournal Entry Overview:
Each module will require that you write and submit a thoughtful and reflective journal entry.

These journal entries should be personally reflective, and their primary purpose is for helping you to formulate your own personal responses to the material.
The journal entries are not meant to be necessarily “academic” in nature, and you will be graded on honesty and effort.

Journal Entry Instructions:

Submit a reflective journal entry, in which you:
1. Discuss a topic or issue directly relevant to the subject matter of this module. (For example, this could be a topic related to one of the essay questions about which you did not write, discussing a point that you personally find thought-provoking.)
2. Include your own personal reaction to the topic, and why or how it is personally relevant for you today. (That is, discuss why you personally find the topic to be especially thought-provoking, or how the topic is personally relevant for you, and/or for your own deeper understanding of the philosophy of religion.)
3. Double-space your journal entry, include your name at the top, and be sure to cite all sources quoted or paraphrased from (even if it’s only our textbooks).
This journal entry is DUE by the end of Module 1. Submit it to the Module 1 Journal dropbox no later than the last day of this module.


· See the Grading Rubric attached to this assignment for grading information.
· To see a helpful example of a model journal entry, look in the Start Here module.
· Each journal entry must be written and submitted to its Assignment Dropbox before the end of its module.Essay Overview:
Each module will require that you write and submit a thoughtful essay, of 1500 to 2000 words, in response to ANY ONE of the several essay question choices provided within that module.
The assigned essay question is drawn directly from its module’s assigned textbook readings. Your essay should provide a relevant, thorough, and detailed response to the essay question assigned. Draw directly upon our assigned reading in order to carefully craft your response.

Essay Instructions:

1. Write and submit a thoughtful, thorough, substantial essay, of at least 1500 words, in direct response to ONE (your choice) of the essay questions below.
2. Draw directly upon our assigned textbook readings for this module in carefully crafting your detailed response.
3. Please double-space your essay, include your name at the top of its first page, and be sure to cite all sources quoted or paraphrased from (even if it’s only our textbooks).
4. Don’t forget to include a bibliography or “works cited” page at the end!

Module 1 Essay Questions: 

(Choose just ONE to answer — either 1, 2, or 3):
1. According to RRB’s chapter 1, what is the difference between reflective and unreflective engagement on the matter of religious questions? How does this question help to further distinguish between religious “believers” and “non-believers”? Is the distinction useful? Why or why not?
2. Discuss and critically analyze the positions of William Clifford and William James on the roles of reason and faith as justification for religious beliefs. Can their conflict be resolved? If so, how? If not, why not?
3. What problem, essentially, is C. Stephen Evans attempting to resolve? Is his resolution effective? Why or why not?


· See the Grading Rubric attached to this assignment for grading information.
· Each essay must be written and submitted to its Assignment Dropbox before the end of its module. (See the Course Schedule for module start/end dates and due dates.)
· For additional guidance and helpful pointers to further assist you in successfully completing your essays, see Writing Philosophy Essays, Writing Thesis Statements, and Sample Essay  in the Start Here module.Module 1 Discussion: God and Faith [Begin by: 03/06]



Discussion Overview:

Module 1’s main discussion questions will focus primarily upon the content of the assigned textbook readings (from both our RRB and POR texts) for this module. See the Course Schedule, or the Module 1 Assignment list, for the specific RRB chapters and POR selections in question.

Discussion Instructions:

1. Respond to EACH of the three Module 1 discussion questions presented below (questions A, B & C). Do so using separate posts for each question; do NOT respond to multiple questions within the same single post.
2. Continue to participate by submitting additional followup posts in response to each question. Before the module ends, be sure to provide at least TWO substantive responses to EACH of the following discussion questions:

Question A: According to Trigg, is there a problem with a “detached” study of religion? Is he correct, in your mind?

Question B: What exactly is the Principle of Credulity, and how does it relate to claims about mystical experience? Do you think Martin’s criticisms are justified?

Question C: What is Clifford’s position on the need for sufficient evidence for religious belief? Do you think James responds effectively to Clifford’s challenge?A Brief Guide to Writing Philosophy Essays

General Instructions: One of the things that makes philosophy unique is the fact that because the content of the subject can only be examined and understood through argument, your understanding of the subject can only be through your own writing, and your own arguments. For this reason, all essay questions within this course are meant to do two things: First, they are meant to help me assess your comprehension of the material, and the basic arguments within the particular articles or chapters that have been assigned. Second, they are designed to give you an opportunity to assess the arguments that you have presented, and to form you own opinion about the matter. Answering the question fully will allow you to do this.
Please note, then, that I expect your essays to have not only a thesis statement within the introductory paragraph (see 
Writing Thesis Statements
 for more on this), but also a bibliography/list of works cited, from which you have derived your material. A failure to provide these two items can affect your grade for the essay. Your thesis statement should answer the evaluative portion of the question. (Note that I am less concerned about whether or not your provide these elements for your reflective journal entry.)

In general, a philosophy essay should reflect a concerted effort to explain and analyze the issue addressed in the question. Answers should be your own answers. Cutting and pasting answers from the text is plagiarism and is NOT ACCEPTABLE, but your answer should make use of the text and not be mere assertion. If you use sources (our texts, or others), identify them, or “cite” them as they say in composition class. This is easy to do, and something you should get used to doing. 

In particular, for philosophy essays in this course, I would like to see the following formatting structure:

1. Your name and the question you are answering at the beginning of the essay.

2. A short opening paragraph that answers the question prompt briefly. You should have at least: a) one sentence in which you discuss the topic and the reasons given for the position that is addressed; and b) you should also have at least one sentence providing an evaluation of the content topic of the question asked, and a reason for your evaluation (the reason for your evaluation can be an answer to the portion of the question prompt that asks: Why or why not?). NOTE: This will be your thesis statement for your essay.

3. In the paragraphs that follow, the body of your essay, both: a) explicate the main content of the opening paragraph, and b) provide a more detailed discussion of the reasons for your evaluation as stated in your thesis statement. This second part should be at least a couple of paragraphs in length.

Your essays should be in third person (he, she, it, they), avoiding as much as possible the first and second person (I, we, you), especially “I feel/think that….”  This is because we hope that point1

Jenny Student

CCCOnline, PHI 214

Spring, 2010: Essay Unit 1

According to Chapter 1, what is the difference between reflective and unreflective
engagement on the matter of religious questions? How does this question help to further

distinguish between religious “believers” and “non-believers”? Is the distinction useful?
Why or why not?

Genuine philosophical discussion requires a willingness to consider and engage

perspectives that may be different from our own. When the topic of God arises in conversation, it

can become challenging to keep this goal in mind, since theists and non-theists alike can become

dogmatic in their positions, and unwilling to engage the matter philosophically. However, it is

necessary to make a distinction between reflective and unreflective engagement. The difference

between reflective and unreflective engagement on religious questions is one of a willingness to

participate in philosophical inquiry, of taking the beliefs that one has and holding them up for

critical examination. The usefulness of the distinction is this: Two individuals may have radically

different views about whether or not God exists, but if they share in a willingness to practice

reflective engagement, then the potential also exists for genuine philosophical discussion and

mutually respectful participation in matters that are of “absolute concern.”

Reflective reason is absolutely essential when we wish to engage in the study of the

philosophy of religion, since reflective reason is central to the study of philosophy.

There is not much of a distinction between reflective believers and reflective non-believers

because they are both are open to scrutinizing their belief systems, and are willing to hold those

beliefs up to scrutiny by others. In order to engage in philosophy of religion or on any other

topic in philosophy, we must be able to systematically and thoroughly examine our arguments

and be able to give rational accounts for their ideas and/or beliefs. As Peterson, et al. point out:

Comment [EMH1]: You are encouraged to put
your name, course, term, and assignment at the top

of your work so that if I need to print it out, I can
quickly and correctly identify you as the author.

Comment [EMH2]: Be sure to always print the
question you are answering at the top of your essay
so that I know which question you are attempting to

answer and whether or not you have answered it


Notice that this question has two components: a) a

factual element, in which you are meant to explain
content that you have read, and b) an open-ended

evaluative component, in which you are invited to

argue for your own view.

Comment [EMH3]: This first paragraph as a
whole does two things: 1) It provides a concise
answer to part a) of the question (the content of the

reading), and 2) It provides a thesis statement. Note

that Jenny only summarizes her answer to the
question, dJenny Socrates

Unit 4 Journal Entry

Journal Entry Unit 4


Submit a journal entry in which you:

1. Discuss a topic or issue relevant to this Unit. And

2. If applicable, your personal reaction to it and why or how it is relevant for you today.

I believe these chapters were the hardest for me to face. I do believe part of it was because of the

sudden death of my uncle which caused me to devour the book looking for some sort of answer

or some sort of proof that everything was okay. Linda Badham’s argument against the traditional

teaching of theism was difficult at best. Life after death was put on the chopping block in her

argument. Her arguments did seem plausible but very hard to swallow and ultimately had to

create my own thoughts at my quest’s end.

Linda Badham’s argument that we would be resurrected in the body that died is very strong. She

makes very good points about how we as humans through our lives share and is changed by our

environment. Never in my right mind could I believe that in the end we as humans could be

resurrected as Jesus was in a million years. This is partially because my thoughts lean towards

cremation. If we are resurrected in what was buried all I would be in the end is a really nice,

smart, thinking pile of ash. That isn’t a very nice thought to me. A lot of people are cremated so

at least I won’t be alone in the heap of ash that will be I guess.

I also found her thoughts provoking about the limitations of people that could be resurrected.

Millions of people are buried, if they all stood up now we would pile one on top of the other and

have no room for anything. I was taught though of no mountains and no bodies of water to be

had in the end during the final resurrection. This would allow for a lot more room for the dead to

inhabit. I didn’t like her theory of a limited number or chosen people for resurrection. It is the

Comment [EMH1]: For the journal entries, I am
not going to be quite as strict about format and style,

though I would like to see a clear thesis statement of

some kind. The point is for you to provide a

“meditation,” rather than a comprehensive essay, on

the issues that we address in class.

Comment [EMH2]: You don’t have to reprint
the instructions, though if you do so, it may help
you to focus your thoughts and structure for your

Comment [EMH3]: Jenny mentions her
response to the material in Unit 4 in a way that is
personal for her, and intriguing; you don’t have to
do this to write a good journal entry, though it
keeps it interesting for me to read.

Jenny Socrates

Unit 4 Journal Entry

same problem I run into with Christianity. To me heaven is a place where there is no sorrow or

hurt. My aunt for example is a very devout atheist and if you don’t believe in god you’re not in

the book of life when you die. I will say supposedly this is why I think I am agnostic. I couldn’t

imagine heaven in the end wit3/18/22, 11:50 PM Turnitin 1/4

Turnitin Originality
Processed on: 18-Mar-2022 11:49 PM MDT

ID: 1776873673

Word Count: 1851

Submitted: 1

Module 1 Essay.Ramic.docx By
Fiki Ramic

74% match (student papers from 12-Mar-2018)
Class: PHI214C40 Philosophy of Religion: AH3 (Erik Hanson) SP18
Assignment: Module 1 Essay Assignment
Paper ID: 929359609

1% match (Submitted to Arizona State University)
Submitted to Arizona State University

1% match (student papers from 07-Dec-2014)
Submitted to Northeastern Illinois University on 2014-12-07

1% match (student papers from 23-May-2021)
Submitted to Grace College on 2021-05-23

Fiki Ramic Professor Hanson PHI214 03/02/2022 Reflective and unreflective
engagement Different people have had varied perspectives throughout history
when it comes to religious concerns. Some of the beliefs are similar from one
religion to another, but some are totally different. Most religions have been
preoccupied with elevating their God above all others. They believe that their
God is the most powerful in the universe in all perspectives. Religion has
become the fuel for a fire of hatred in today’s globe. Religion has become the
most divisive topic of discussion in the world. As a result, this calls for an
inclusive philosophical discussion that will accommodate beliefs, opinions, and
perspectives that differ from our own. When the subject of God comes up, it’s
always tough to stay on track to the conclusion. It’s because theists and
atheists have become adamant in their beliefs and are unwilling to engage in
a philosophical discussion. As a result, a differentiation between reflective and
non-reflective involvement has become important. Reflective engagement is a
commitment to engage in a philosophical study of one’s standards and beliefs
for critical scrutiny in the setting of religion. The significance of this contrast
is that it brings together two parties with fundamentally contrary views on
the presence of God. A true solution will be established in mutual respect and
favor if these parties are prepared to engage in a reflective engagement
employing a philosophical approach (Bender, Courtney, et al., pg. 72). When
it comes to studying philosophy, reflective thinking is the essential aspect. As
a result, if we want to engage in religious philosophy, we must use simple
contemplative reason. Reflecting believers and reflective non-believers are
separated by a thin line. Both types of believers are willing to question their
own beliefs and stand them up to scrutiny by others. We should be able to
properly evaluate our thoughts and come up with rational and sensible

Similarity Index

Internet Sources: 3%
Publications: 1%
Student Papers: 77%

Similarity by Source

Why Choose Us

  • 100% non-plagiarized Papers
  • 24/7 /365 Service Available
  • Affordable Prices
  • Any Paper, Urgency, and Subject
  • Will complete your papers in 6 hours
  • On-time Delivery
  • Money-back and Privacy guarantees
  • Unlimited Amendments upon request
  • Satisfaction guarantee

How it Works

  • Click on the “Place Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
  • Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER DETAILS" section.
  • Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
  • Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
  • From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.