Teaching & Learning Guide for: The Axiology of Theism: Problems and Prospects
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Does God exist? This is a question that philosophers have sought to answer for centuries. But consider the following: What is the value impact of God's existence? Would God's existence be good or bad? Should we want God to exist? These are questions that have only very recently garnered attention from philosophers. To date, they have mostly been tackled by comparing a world where God exists to another world as similar to it as possible but where God doesn't exist. Two main answers have emerged. Pro-theism is the view that God's existence would increase the value of the world. Anti-theism is the view that God's existence would decrease the value of the world. Kahane, Guy. (2011). Should we want God to exist? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 82: 674- 696. This is the article credited with starting the axiology of theism literature. Early versions of arguments for anti-theism based on meaning and other goods are explored. Kraay, Klaas J. and Chris Dragos. (2013) On preferring God's non-existence. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 43: 153–178. This article directly criticizes Kahane 2011. It is also one of the first places to carefully distinguish between the different scopes of axiological judgments and how they impact axiological questions about God. Kraay, Klaas J. ed. (2018) Does God Matter? Essays on the Axiological Consequences of Theism. New York: Routledge. This is an edited volume containing contributions from many prominent philosophers of religion, each of whom stakes out a unique position. Kraay, Klaas J. (2021). The Axiology of Theism. Cambridge University Press. This short book expands the axiology of theism debate by exploring different ways of motivating pro-theism. Lougheed, Kirk. (2020). The Axiological Status of Theism and Other Worldviews. Palgrave Macmillan. The first full-length monograph on the axiology of theism. It offers a series of arguments for anti-theism. Lougheed, Kirk. ed. (2020) Four Views on the Axiology of Theism: What Difference Does God Make? London: Bloomsbury. This volume contains four contributors who each take up and defend different positions on the axiology of theism. There are replies and rejoinders for each chapter. Lougheed, Kirk. (2022). Ubuntu and Western Monotheism: An Axiological Investigation. Routledge. The first extensive discussion of the axiology of theism which makes significant use of African philosophy, including communitarian ethics and Traditional African Religion. Penner, Myron A. (2015). “Personal anti-theism and the meaningful life argument. Faith and Philosophy 32: 325–337. This is the first place to lay out the meaningful life argument in explicit premise/conclusion format. Podcast on Lougheed's The Axiological Status of Theism and Other Worldviews: Kirk Lougheed https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cDovL3Jzcy5jYXN0Ym94LmZtL2V2ZXJlc3QvMWFlYjcwYTA0YmIzNGRhZjk4NDEyZmE4NDViNjFmNTgueG1s/episode/YWxidW0tMWFlYjcwYTA0YmIzNGRhZjk4NDEyZmE4NDViNjFmNTgtNGQ3MDk5NGRmZmY4NDA3YmEwODRkNWQ4NGIwMzNjMGY. Youtube Podcast on Pro-Theism v. Anti-Theism: Klaas J. Kraay. https://youtu.be/GJYvU5M0SOs Klaas J. Kraay walks through the debate between pro-theism and anti-theism. Youtube Podcast on The Axiology of Theism: Klaas J. Kraay. https://youtu.be/KUYQ_vYwb60 Klaas J. Kraay discusses his Cambridge Element, The Axiology of Theism. Youtube Podcast on Should we want God to exist? https://youtu.be/bZ9dZbgKJ44 Liz Jackson makes connections between the axiology of theism and epistemology (the study of knowledge and rational belief). Living Bibliography of the Axiology of Theism. https://people.ryerson.ca/kraay/Documents/AXBIB.pdf This is an online bibliography maintained by Klaas J. Kraay. Kraay, K.J. (2018) Invitation to the axiology of theism. In K.J. Kraay, ed., Does God Matter? Essays on the Axiological Consequences of Theism. New York: Routledge, pp. 1–36. Lougheed, K. (2019) The axiology of theism. In J. Feiser and B. Dowden, eds., Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Lougheed, K. (2020). “The Axiological Status of Theism and Other Worldviews. Palgrave MacMillan. pp. 8–17. Mugg, J. (2016) The quietest challenge to the axiology of God: a cognitive approach to counterpossibles. Faith and Philosophy 33: 441–60. Kahane, G. (2011) Should we want God to exist? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 82: 674- 696. Lougheed, K. (2020). “Chapter Three: The Privacy Argument for Personal Anti-Theism.” In The Axiological Status of Theism and Other Worldviews. Palgrave MacMillan. Penner, M.A. (2015) Personal anti-theism and the meaningful life argument. Faith and Philosophy 32: 325–337. Kraay, K.J. (2021). The Axiology of Theism. Cambridge University Press. pp.46–53. Kraay, K.J. and Dragos, C. (2013) On preferring God's non-existence. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 43: 153–178. Penner, M.A. and Lougheed, K. (2015). Pro-theism and the added value of morally good agents. Philosophia Christi 17: 53–69. Schellenberg, J.L. (2018) Triple transcendence, the value of God's existence, and a new route to atheism. In Kraay, K., ed., Does God Matter? Essays on the Axiological Consequences of Theism. New York: Routledge, pp.181–191. Penner, M.A. and Arbour, B. (2018) Arguments from evil and evidence for pro-theism. In Kraay, K., ed., Does God Matter? Essays on the Axiological Consequences of Theism. New York: Routledge, pp. 192–202. Lougheed, Kirk. (2022). “Chapter Seven: The Axiology of Theism and Differences Between Supernatural Ubuntu and Secular Ubuntu” in Ubuntu and Western Monotheism: An Axiological Investigation. Metz, Thaddeus and Motsamai Molefe. (2021). “Traditional African Religion as a Neglected Form of Monotheism. The Monist 104 (3): 393–409. What is the difference between the existential and axiological questions about God? Why are some sceptical about the intelligibility of axiological questions about God? Describe the challenge based on counterpossibles. Describe what you think is the best argument for pro-theism. Why do you think it's the best? What might the anti-theist say in reply? Describe what you think is the best argument for anti-theism. Why do you think it's the best? What might the pro-theist say in reply? Why is an atheist who endorses the problem of evil as a reason for their atheism committed to pro-theism? Why do some philosophers argue that the truth of anti-theism (a value judgment) entails the truth of atheism (a judgment about exists)? Kirk Lougheed is Assistant Professor of Philosophy and Director of the Center for Faith and Human Flourishing at LCC International University. He is also a Research Associate at the University of Pretoria. He has published over 30 journal articles or book chapters including in such places as Ratio, Res Philosophica, and Synthese. He is the author of The Epistemic Benefits of Disagreement (Springer 2020), The Axiological Status of Theism and Other Worldviews (Palgrave 2020), Ubuntu and Western Monotheism: An Axiological Investigation (Routledge, 2022), editor of Four Views on the Axiology of Theism: What Difference Does God Make? (Bloomsbury 2020), and co-editor (with Jonathan Matheson) of Epistemic Autonomy (Routledge, 2022).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it