PHIL 2350: Philosophy of World Religion – Assessment 4
Assignment: The Scholarly Argument Analysis
Course: PHIL 2350 – Philosophy of Religion / World Religions
Due Date: Sunday of Week 7 by 11:59 PM (Local Time)
Length Requirement: 1,500–1,800 words (approx. 6–7 pages)
Need a custom essay writer? Superior paper help with writing a similar assignment: John Hick vs Alvin Plantinga?
Our qualified academic writers, 75% of whom hold Masters or PhD degrees, write fully original papers tailored to your rubric, citation style, and deadline. Rated 4.9/5 by thousands of students. Free Turnitin plagiarism report included.
Get Expert Help →Format: Current Turabian (Notes-Bibliography) or APA 7th Edition
Overview
Philosophy of Religion is not merely the history of ideas; it is the rigorous logical evaluation of truth claims. In a world characterized by conflicting religious diversity, the philosopher must ask: “Can contradictory claims about the Ultimate Reality all be true?”
This assignment requires you to move beyond emotional or sociological descriptions of religion and engage in hard epistemic analysis. You will evaluate the logical coherence of a specific response to the problem of religious diversity (Exclusivism, Inclusivism, or Pluralism). You are expected to demonstrate high-level critical thinking skills: defining terms precisely, constructing valid syllogisms, and anticipating strong counter-arguments.
Can someone write my paper professionally and confidentially?
Yes — My Homework Ace Tutors connects you with expert human writers in your subject area. Every paper is written from scratch (zero AI), checked for plagiarism, formatted to your specifications, and delivered before your deadline with 100% confidentially. Free revisions for 14 days.
🖉 Start My Order →Instructions
Write a 1,500- to 1,800-word argumentative essay (Submit a 6–7 page philosophical essay) that analyzes one of the following philosophical positions regarding religious diversity:
Option 1: The Pluralistic Hypothesis (John Hick)
Analyze Hick’s distinction between the “Real an sich” (in itself) and the “Real as experienced.” Does his Kantian framework successfully solve the problem of conflicting truth claims, or does it strip specific religions of their essential content?
Option 2: Reformed Epistemology & Exclusivism (Alvin Plantinga)
Evaluate Plantinga’s defense of religious exclusivism. Is it intellectually arrogant to hold that one’s own beliefs are true without independent evidence, or is belief in God “properly basic”?
Save 20% on your first order today
Use code SAVE20 at checkout. Our writers deliver AI-free, plagiarism-free papers ranging from short 1-page essays to full dissertations, and with deadlines from 4 hours to weeks due assignments. Money-back guarantee included.
🏢 Claim 20% Off →Option 3: The “Religious Ambiguity” Thesis (John Schellenberg)
Critique the argument that the hiddenness of God (divine silence) supports a skeptical or pluralistic approach. If a loving God existed, would He make His specific revelation available to all?
Essay Structure
Your paper must follow a standard philosophical essay format:
- Introduction (approx. 10%): Define the specific philosophical problem (e.g., The logical incompatibility of theistic and non-theistic traditions). State your thesis clearly.
- Exposition (approx. 30%): Reconstruct the argument of your chosen philosopher (Hick, Plantinga, or Schellenberg) with the “Principle of Charity.” Explain their view so well that they would accept your description.
- Critical Evaluation (approx. 40%): This is the core of the assignment. Offer a logical critique. You must identify at least one logical fallacy or weak premise in their argument.
- Defense (approx. 10%): How would the philosopher respond to your critique? Give them the “last word” before your final rebuttal.
- Conclusion (approx. 10%): Summarize the implications of your argument for the study of World Religion.
Grading Rubric
| Criteria | Distinguished (A) | Competent (B-C) | Deficient (F) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Logical Rigor (40%) | Arguments are formally valid and sound. Identifies premises clearly. Avoids informal fallacies (e.g., Ad Hominem, Straw Man). | Arguments are generally logical but may rely on unstated premises or assertive language rather than demonstration. | Relying on emotional appeals or personal testimony rather than philosophical argumentation. |
| Exposition & Charity (30%) | Explains the opposing view with nuance and fairness before critiquing it. Demonstrates mastery of the source text. | Summary of the philosopher is accurate but superficial. Misses the nuance of their specific definitions. | Misrepresents the philosopher’s view (“Straw Man”) to make it easier to attack. |
| Engagement with Literature (20%) | Integrates 6+ scholarly sources (monographs/journals). Interaction shows deep reading of the field. | Uses minimum sources. engagement is limited to direct quotes without synthesis. | Uses dictionary definitions or popular websites instead of philosophical literature. |
| Clarity & Style (10%) | Precise philosophical terminology used correctly (e.g., ontology, epistemology, necessary/contingent). | Writing is clear but lacks technical precision. Occasional formatting errors. | Vague language obscures the argument. “Word salad.” |
John Hick’s “Pluralistic Hypothesis” attempts to resolve the conflicting truth claims of world religions by positing a distinction between the Real an sich (in itself) and the Real as humanly experienced. However, this solution faces a fatal epistemic defect often termed the “vacuity objection.” If, as Hick argues, the Real an sich transcends all human categories—including goodness, personality, and existence—then it becomes impossible to predicate anything meaningful about it at all. As noted by George Mavrodes, a “God” who cannot be described as good or personal is functionally indistinguishable from no God at all (Mavrodes 2020). Consequently, Hick’s attempt to save all religions ends up eviscerating the core doctrinal claims that make those religions intelligible to their practitioners. A robust philosophy of religion must be willing to accept that if two claims are contradictory, they cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time.
Recommended Resources
- Copan, Paul. A Little Book for New Philosophers: Why and How to Study Philosophy. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2018.
- Craig, William Lane, and J.P. Moreland. Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview. 2nd Edition. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2019. Publisher Link
- Gellman, Jerome. Experiencing God: A Theology of Human Emergence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023.
- Meister, Chad, and Paul Moser, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Religious Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020. DOI Link
- Plantinga, Alvin. Knowledge and Christian Belief. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2018 (Accessible version of Warranted Christian Belief).
- Walls, Jerry L., and Trent Dougherty, eds. The Plantinga Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.
