PHRE Conference

In Augustine’s, On Free Choice of the Will, the theologian commits to answer and soothe his troubled friend Evodius. Evodius is plagued with seemingly overwhelming questions and dispirited preconceived notions regarding God and Free Will. The crux of this paper aims to examine and contemplate the answers Augustine gives to one of Evodius’s most complex questions, “Whether God is the cause of evil?”. The conversation between Augustine and Evodius is immersive and at once captivating, for when one is reading this dialogue, it is not Evodius asking the questions, but you. This dialogue is pivotal for human thought as it reveals that our nature is not evil nor is it one of chained servitude. Augustine reveals that free will is indeed a gift and not a “gift” from an evil god but from the all-knowing, and truly good God.

Situational comedies, or sitcoms, as a form of media, can serve to introduce individuals to behaviors and social norms that that may begin to impact the beliefs and behaviors of viewers over time. They can also serve to reflect existing norms, like gender roles or parental behaviors. Sitcoms provide a window into the social norms, such as religious practices, of a specific time period that can be reflective of societal norms in wider society at that time. Previous research has focused on the extent to which sitcoms have reflected the social norms of their time, but research that tracks changes in societal behavior in regard to religion over time is lacking. I conducted a content analysis of top-rated sitcoms over seven decades to determine whether the amount or type of religiosity present in sitcoms has changed over time. My analysis found that there was no significant relationship between religiosity and the decade that a sitcoms aired from the 1950’s to the 2010’s.

This paper examines the philosophical and theological perspectives of Anselm and Aquinas on the knowledge of God, exploring the relationship between the philosophical science and the divine science. It delves into Aquinas’s assertion that humanity is directed to a knowledge of God that surpasses reason and compares it to Anselm’s concept of “That Than Which Nothing Greater Can Be Thought.” The paper contrasts Anselm’s a posteriori argument in the Monologion, which reasons from observable world to the existence of a supreme being, with the Proslogion, which relies on divine illumination and prayer. It further analyzes Aquinas’s “five ways” as logical proofs of God’s existence, while considering the limitations of human understanding without divine participation. This paper emphasizes humility and faith as prerequisites to approaching the divine, as seen in Anselm’s Proslogion and Amphilochios’ story.

Stoicism, an ancient philosophy, remains profoundly relevant in addressing modern existential challenges. This paper explores how Stoic principles, centered on self-improvement and contentment, offer practical solutions to the pervasive issue of existential drift—a state of feeling unmoored and purposeless in a rapidly changing world. By focusing on internal satisfaction and independence from external factors, Stoicism provides a framework for living a fulfilling life despite external uncertainties. The philosophy’s emphasis on living in the present moment, emulating the virtues of a “wise man,” and finding meaning in constant self-improvement, counters the despair associated with existential drift. In effect, this essay highlights the enduring value of Stoic practices in fostering resilience, purpose, and well-being in contemporary society

The iconic figure of Jesus Christ has been constantly evolving throughout history, shaped by various cultural, political, and religious influences. While some interpretations have been used to justify oppression and domination, others have championed liberation and social justice. As a response to this symbolic complexity, the new concept of the UrMessiah arises to unite people across cultural and religious divides. In this talk, we will explore the historical accuracy of Jesus’s ministry in Judea, Ancient Palestine, and how it relates to his subsequent portrayal as a universal symbol of love, justice, and peace. By covering 2000 years of history in 20 minutes, audience members will become closer to answering our next century’s foundational question, “Which versions of Christianity are left standing?” Join us for this exciting exploration of how the UrMessiah will be used in the religious and philosophical pursuit of searching for the ultimate truth.

The doctrine of divine impassibility holds that God does not experience emotional changes in response to his creation. This view, foundational in classical theism, has been challenged in recent years by passibilist theologians who maintain that God does experience emotions. They maintain that if God truly loves his creation, he must be vulnerable to suffering in response to their plight. It is my aim to engage with these tensions from a Christian perspective, exploring the difficult implications of attributing emotions to God. I will begin by offering a working definition of emotion as a “conscious mental response to external stimuli.” Given this definition, I will seek to show how emotions are incompatible with certain characteristics of God—namely, his atemporality and aseity. I conclude that while the Biblical literature uses emotional language to describe God, such language should be interpreted analogically, preserving both God’s perfection and his dynamic relationship with creation.

In the Divine Comedy, Dante embarks on a journey through Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven. It isn’t until Dante reaches the end of his journey, when he draws nearer to God, that he examines, with the encouragement of the Saints, the three theological virtues: Faith, Hope, and Charity. The heart of this paper is the examination of my own understandings of the three theological virtues regarding their role in the Inferno, the Purgatorio, and the Paradiso. Upon reading this paper one will find in the Inferno the complete denial of these virtues and the consequent distortion of the Image of God; in the Purgatorio, they will find these virtues are most desperately needed, and that in Paradiso, Faith and Hope are no longer necessary and Charity is made perfect. Through this examination the reader may find within himself an ardent desire for the Paradiso.

Delving into the portrayal of female monstrosity in Gothic literature through the lens of Julia Kristeva’s theory of abjection, this paper examines how characters like Lucy in Dracula and Bella in Twilight navigate the paradox of empowerment and entrapment. The analysis explores how female figures assert agency by embracing the monstrous, and confront societal boundaries related to sexuality, identity, and morality. Yet, this journey toward autonomy is fraught with consequences, as monstrosity risks reinforcing patriarchal structures and alienating women from their humanity. Integrating Freud’s concept of the uncanny and Nietzsche’s will to power, the paper underscores the precarious nature of empowerment through monstrosity. The research ultimately questions whether true liberation can be achieved through the abject or if it only serves as another tool of confinement, suggesting that genuine freedom may lie in reclaiming one’s humanity beyond the grotesque.

Within the four dominant traditions of metaphoric philosophy, comparativism is often the most overshadowed. Dating back to Aristotle and Cicero, the comparative view is often shelved in favor of the theories of Donald Davidson or Max Black, which, on account of their recency, adhere closer to contemporary standards of rigor. In a defense of a branch of comparativist theory, the Figurative Simile Theory (FST), guided by Robert Fogelin and William Lycan, I illustrate that with a few tweaks FST may be considered the most well-founded theory of metaphoric meaning. I explore how public intension of language, cultural understanding, and poetic distinction could shift the way we attempt to interpret metaphor and create a more comprehensive understanding of how metaphors work in the English language.

In Peter Singer’s Practical Ethics, he presents an argument in favor of the principle of equal consideration. This principle would treat the like interests of all beings equally when making ethical decisions. Peter Singer supports this principle through an abductive argument of inference to the best explanation. In my paper I argue that Singer’s argument fails to provide all the relevant moral data to the principle he is arguing for. Furthermore, I present several alternative principles that both account for the intuitions Singer hopes to explain while also accounting for data that Singer omits from his analysis. While these principles may also have issues, they provide us with equal or better explanations of human moral intuition than the PEC. Therefore, these alternatives challenge the idea that the principle of equal consideration is the best available explanation for the relevant data.