Skip to main content

Heythrop College MA taster day (I am speaking)

MA Taster Day

25 January 2013 10:00

Category: Open Days and Evenings

Want to try a university course before you apply?


10.00 a.m. – 5.30 p.m.

This MA Taster day will provide prospective postgraduate students with a taste of what a course at Heythrop is like. You will have the opportunity to hear and meet some of our most experienced lecturers and gain an insight into the additional facilities available in the College.


Stay all day (with lunch included) or dip in and out – all for free!


A provisional programme for the day is as follows:

10.00    Arrive, register, coffee                           

10.30    Interreligious Relations / Abrahamic Religions   
The Impact of Modernity on Abrahamic Religions: The Muslims' Reactions, Dr Ahmad Achtar
                       
Contemporary Ethics                               
Ethics and Contemporary Morality: What’s the Difference?, Dr Anna Abram

11.30    Biblical Studies   
Society Structures and Paul's Assembly in Corinth, Dr Jonathan Norton   
               
Psychology of Religion                   
Has Psychological Understanding Put God in Question? A New Look at Freud and Jung, Prof Rachel Blass

12.30    Philosophy                                       
Sceptical Moves in Classroom Debates and their Resolution, Dr Stephen Law

1.30    Lunch    (provided)

2.30    Christian Spirituality                      
Themes in Christian Spirituality, Dr Edward Howells

Christian Theology                           
Creation, Salvation and the Structure of Christian Theology, Dr Martin Poulsom

3.30    Canon Law                     
The Church, Money and Public Benefit, Dr Helen Costigane   

Pastoral Theology
Keeping Faith in Practice: Theology in Action, Dr James Sweeney

Bookings

Please click here to book your place.


If you have any queries about the day, please do not hesitate to contact us at a.clarkson@heythrop.ac.uk

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen

What is Humanism?

What is Humanism? “Humanism” is a word that has had and continues to have a number of meanings. The focus here is on kind of atheistic world-view espoused by those who organize and campaign under that banner in the UK and abroad. We should acknowledge that there remain other uses of term. In one of the loosest senses of the expression, a “Humanist” is someone whose world-view gives special importance to human concerns, values and dignity. If that is what a Humanist is, then of course most of us qualify as Humanists, including many religious theists. But the fact remains that, around the world, those who organize under the label “Humanism” tend to sign up to a narrower, atheistic view. What does Humanism, understood in this narrower way, involve? The boundaries of the concept remain somewhat vague and ambiguous. However, most of those who organize under the banner of Humanism would accept the following minimal seven-point characterization of their world-view.

Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism refuted

Here's my central criticism of Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN). It's novel and was published in Analysis last year. Here's the gist. Plantinga argues that if naturalism and evolution are true, then semantic epiphenomenalism is very probably true - that's to say, the content of our beliefs does not causally impinge on our behaviour. And if semantic properties such as having such-and-such content or being true cannot causally impinge on behaviour, then they cannot be selected for by unguided evolution. Plantinga's argument requires, crucially, that there be no conceptual links between belief content and behaviour of a sort that it's actually very plausible to suppose exist (note that to suppose there are such conceptual links is not necessarily to suppose that content can be exhaustively captured in terms of behaviour or functional role, etc. in the way logical behaviourists or functionalists suppose). It turns o