Promoting multiculturalism through renewed East-West and Confucian-Christian dialogue, Neville (philosophy, religion, and theology, Boston U.) fosters the idea ...

Religion in Late Modernity runs against the grain of common suppositions of contemporary theology and philosophy of religion. Against the common supposition that basic religious terms have no real reference but are mere functions of human need, the book presents a pragmatic theory of religious symbolism in terms of which the cognitive engagement of the Ultimate is of a piece with the cognitive engagement of nature and persons. Throughout this discussion, Neville develops a late-modern conception of God that is (...) defensible in a global theological public. Against the common supposition that religion is on the retreat in late modernity except in fundamentalist forms, the author argues that religion in our time is a stimulus to religiously oriented scholarship, a civilizing force among world societies, a foundation for obligation in politics, a source for healthy social experimentation, and the most important mover of soul. (shrink)

Explores ultimate realities in a range of world religions and discusses the issue and philosophical implications of comparison itself.

The Tao and the Daimon examines a central theme in religious studies: the question of the authority and authenticity of traditional religious faith and practice (tao) in light of the challenge from the spirit of critical reason (Socrates' daimon). From a non-judgmental, historical standpoint, it develops the dialectical relation between religion and rational inquiry. Neville employs a philosophical system to set a task for reflection, making it possible to see how Eastern and Western religious traditions differ, overlap, contradict, and (...) reinforce one another. The central chapters are detailed studies of theologically interesting elements in Christianity, Buddhism, taoism, and Neoconfucianism. How can one judge of the higher truths of another religion without having practiced it? Can the tao and the daimon, after all, be reconciled purely in the conceptual realm of speculative philosophy? Neville recognizes the very real differences between conceptualizing and practicing and the very real differences in understanding that can result. At the same time, he transcends the problem by identifying (and exemplifying in his own work) speculative philosophy as a tao in itself, "a new locus of religious significance, our own scholarly interpretation, new creations of the holy out of practiced scholarly piety toward the old.". (shrink)

David R. Griffin’s new Whitehead’s Radically Different Post-modern Philosophy: An Argument for Its Contemporary Relevance (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2007) contains a chapter-long Whiteheadian response to several criticisms I have leveled against process theology. While encouraging his attempt to promote Whitehead as a preferred alternative to foundationalist modernism and postmodernism, I undertake to rebut Griffin’s arguments through discussions of the following topics: the one and the many (which Whitehead does not treat adequately), the finite versus infinite (...) character of God, creation ex nihilo, the nature of determinateness and the need for every determinate thing to have a creator, the applicability of the Ontological Principle to explaining a complex of first principles, the inclusion of time within ontological eternity, the goodness versus wildness of God, the nature of religious experience, and the uses of religious language. (shrink)

Concerning the connection between God and the created realm, it is maintained that God in himself is independent of the created realm and that the created realm is wholly dependent upon God. This distinction is explicated in trinitarian terms, identifying God as source with the Father, the created realm as dependent with the Son, and the power of creation with the Holy Spirit. Although in himself entirely vague with respect to intelligible determinations, God in the context of creation is intelligible (...) as the trinitarian Persons, and even can be experienced as such. Experience, analogy and dialectic are all essential to the knowledge of God as creator. Furthermore, that the created realm depends wholly upon God insures it the integrity of its own nature, for its integrity consists simply in its having the nature it has; for it to lose its integrity would be for it to cease to be, and what is not cannot suffer loss. ;The second problem with regard to the nature of creation concerns how it takes place, and a theory of contraction is put forward. It is then argued that the determinations of being themselves presuppose a common source of the nature of God as previously discussed. ;With regard to the nature of creation, the first problem concerns the kinds of being that would distinguish the creator from what he creates. It is argued that if the kinds of being are only analogically related qua kinds of being, there could be no knowledge of a connection between them; hence, a univocal sense of being is sought. To steer between the doctrine on the one hand that being in its univocal sense is ens commune, which would leave the specific determinations of being without an account, and the doctrine on the other hand that it is ens perfectissimum, which would allow the comprehensive category of being no meaningful contrast, the following theory is advanced. Being in its univocal sense is characterized as the indeterminate common source of all determinations of being. As source, it accounts for the determinations; as common, it is univocal to all things which are as that which stands them off against absolute non-being; and as indeterminate in itself, it needs no contrast term which would also have to be. Being is intelligibly contrasted with absolute non-being, not in virtue of its essential determinations, but in virtue of its relation as creator to the determinations of being. God is primarily identified with the source of the determinations, and the created realm is said to include all the determinations of being. ;The problems of divine creation cluster around two main issues: the nature of creation and the connection it entails between God and the created realm. (shrink)

That the distinction is over-simple becomes apparent when attention is called to a fundamental difficulty attending any view that being is a single property, common to all the things which are. If being is one property among others, then the question must be raised as to the status of those other properties, insofar as they are or have natures of their own, distinct from being. Simply to have or to be a nature, a requirement for any property, is already to (...) be in some sense or other; yet each property must be in whatever sense this is for it, to contrast with the property of being. If the property of being can be contrasted with other properties, then both sides of the contrast must be in a more inclusive sense. (shrink)

At the same time, however, at least two factors, one theoretical and one practical, argue that the plurality of ideal ends should be reduced to one. The theoretical reason is that "a plurality of ideal ends" seems to be a contradictory phrase when it is said to apply to one individual. For one thing comes to one end, and insofar as the end has a normative aspect, should come to one best end. This theoretical factor, however, is not the concern (...) of the present discussion. (shrink)

Having distinguished the primary philosophers of religion, those whose philosophies of “Everything” entail something about religion, from those who study only or mainly religion, this article discusses the necessary comparative base for the future of the field. It distinguishes the approach that begins with the subject matter from the approach that sticks with a home tradition to which comparison adds new material, arguing for the former. The religions of West Asia, South Asia, and East Asia are discussed, noting the naturalistic (...) form of the last. The fundamental comparative category for philosophy of religion is the Ultimate, of which I give my own version. This version also requires categories defining determinate things, their togetherness of various sorts, and their essential and conditional components. To be plausible, this theory needs to be associated positively and negatively with the main religious traditions and with our relation to nature and society. Religious lives need to be scaled from the primitive and literalistic all the way to the philosophical. Philosophy of religion or philosophical theology of all sorts is fallible and needs to prepare for the next step. (shrink)

LEADERSHIP, I SHALL ARGUE, is a role obligated by social conditions, deriving from the reality of value, and demanding the exercise of courage. Plato, Confucius, and the author of the Books of Samuel enunciated these interlocked themes early in the axial age, and they require fresh reflection in every age. That the bearing of value and courage on leadership is a metaphysical theme, and not merely a topic for political philosophy or Weberian sociology, is a promissory note at this stage (...) in my remarks, to be paid up by their conclusion. (shrink)