Teaching: Courses taught by William A. Dembski

Spring 2013

Philosophy of Religion (SES #PH601; May 6 – 11, 2013)
• Syllabus.
• Please print off my Primer on Probability and read it.
CRITICAL REVIEW: You will need to write a critical review of Richard Dawkins’s The God Delusion. The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point for point, but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. Phillip Johnson is a master of such reviews: go here, here, here, and here. Alvin Plantinga’s review of Dawkins’s The God Delusion is also instructive: go here. For examples of critical reviews by William Dembski, go here, here, and here. You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture.

Evolutionary Biology & Intelligent Design (SES #SC401, #SC501, and #AP862; January 14 – 19, 2013)
• Syllabi: for the undergrad course #SC401, for the mdiv course #SC501, and for the dmin course #AP862.
• “The Spurious Foundations of Genetic Engineering,” a terrific article by Barry Commoner from 2002 that relates nicely to Jonathan Wells’s The Myth of Junk DNA.
• Slides for PowerPoint lecture, 15-16jan2013, click here.
CRITICAL REVIEW: Except for undergrads taking this course, you will need to write a critical review of Thomas Nagel’s Mind & Cosmos. The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point for point, but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. Phillip Johnson is a master of such reviews: go here, here, here, and here. Alvin Plantinga’s review of Dawkins’s The God Delusion is also instructive: go here. For examples of critical reviews by William Dembski, go here, here, and here. You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture.


Spring 2012

Christian Faith and Science (SWBTS #PHILO 4483-A – Spring 2012)
• FINAL EXAM (take-home): click here for rtf version and click here for pdf version. Due Monday, 04.30.12 at 12:00 noon as Word document emailed to the grader Jack Greenoe at dembski.grading.1{AT}gmail.com.
• CRITICAL REVIEW: Your 3000-word critical review of Francis Collins’s The Language of God is due the last day of class at dembski.grading.1{AT}gmail.com. It must also be submitted with Turnitin. The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point for point, but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. Phillip Johnson is a master of such reviews: go hereherehere, and here. Alvin Plantinga’s review of Dawkins’s The God Delusion is also instructive: go here. For examples of critical reviews by William Dembski, go herehere, and here. You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture.
• Syllabus.

Philosophy of Mind/Neuroscience – doctoral seminar (SWBTS #PHILO 7614-A – Spring 2012)
• Syllabus.


Fall 2011

Christian Apologetics (SWBTS #PHILO 4373 – Fall 2011)
• Extra credit assignment involving viewing The Privileged Planet and Inherit the Windclick here for rtf version. Either mail directly to grader or give to me in class.
• CRITICAL REVIEW: Your 3000-word critical review of Martin Gardner’s The Flight of Peter Fromm is due the last day of class at dembski.grading.1{AT}gmail.com. It must also be submitted with Turnitin. The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point for point, but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. Phillip Johnson is a master of such reviews: go hereherehere, and here. Alvin Plantinga’s review of Dawkins’s The God Delusion is also instructive: go here. For examples of critical reviews by William Dembski, go herehere, and here. You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture.
• The quiz that was missed because I was unable to make it to class on Monday (10.10.11) will be counted as extra credit. It is open-book. Please complete it and bring it in hardcopy form to class this Monday (10.17.11). Here it is as an RTF file.
• Syllabus.


Spring 2011

Critical Thinking (SWBTS #PHILO 5373 – Spring 2011)
• Final exam: pdf version and rtf version – be sure to answer the questions on all three pages. The exam is due at 12 noon on Monday, May 2, 2011, via an email attachment to our grader, Jack Greenoe, at dembski.grading.1 AT gmail.com (substitute “@” for “AT”).
• Critically analyze arguments made to advance atheism by a leading contemporary atheist (drawn from the 25 top atheists list at SuperScholar.org). Focus on a single atheist. Analyze his/her arguments as these appear in his/her books, in online postings by him/her, or in videos (debates, interviews, etc.) in which he/she make his/her case. We looked in class at Richard Dawkins’ “Root of All Evil” (sequel = “The Faith Virus”) and you are welcome to critically analyze it (it is available on YouTube here). Sam Harris (#2 on the SuperScholar list) has a video at TED (go here; TED = Technology, Entertainment, Design – www.ted.com). Your critical analysis is to be written up as a research paper 3,000- to 3,500-words in length (approximately 10 pages). Your paper should use the tools developed in this course, especially from Gensler chapter 4 and Murphy chapters 1–4.  At the end of your paper, give the word count. This paper will count as your midterm exam. Please hand in hardcopy of your paper in class on March 21, 2011.
• Syllabus.

Intelligent Design – doctoral seminar (SWBTS #PHILO 7544 – Spring 2011)
• Syllabus.


Fall 2010

Christian Apologetics (SWBTS #PHILO 4373 – Fall 2010)
• FINAL EXAM (take-home): click here for rtf version and click here for pdf version. Due Monday, 12.06.10 at 12:00 noon as Word document emailed to the grader Jack Greenoe at dembski.grading.1{AT}gmail.com.
• CRITICAL REVIEW: Your 4000-word critical review of Martin Gardner’s The Flight of Peter Fromm is due the last day of class at dembski.grading.1{AT}gmail.com. The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point for point, but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. Phillip Johnson is a master of such reviews: go hereherehere, and here. Alvin Plantinga’s review of Dawkins’s The God Delusion is also instructive: go here. For examples of critical reviews by William Dembski, go herehere, and here. You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture.
• Syllabus.


Spring 2010

Christian Faith and Science (SWBTS #PHILO 4483 – Spring 2010)
• FINAL EXAM (take-home): click here for rtf version and click here for pdf version. Due Monday, 05.03.10 at 12:00 noon as Word document emailed to the grader Jack Greenoe at dembski.grading.1{AT}gmail.com.
• CRITICAL REVIEW: Your critical review is due the last day of class at dembski.grading.1{AT}gmail.com. The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point for point, but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. Phillip Johnson is a master of such reviews: go hereherehere, and here. Alvin Plantinga’s review of Dawkins’s The God Delusion is also instructive: go here. For examples of critical reviews by William Dembski, go herehere, andhere. You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture.
• Syllabus.

Christian Faith and Apologetic Issues (SWBTS #PHILO 7514 – Spring 2010)
• CRITICAL REVIEW: Your critical review is due the last day of class at dembski.grading.2{AT}gmail.com. The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point for point, but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. Phillip Johnson is a master of such reviews: go hereherehere, and here. Alvin Plantinga’s review of Dawkins’s The God Delusion is also instructive: go here. For examples of critical reviews by William Dembski, go herehere, andhere. You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture.
• Syllabus.


Fall 2009

Christian Apologetics (SWBTS #PHILO 4373 – Fall 2009)
• Crossing the finish line: Here’s what’s involved in finishing out this course: (1) You need to hand in a hard-copy version of your critical review on Monday, November 30, 2009 in class. (2) You need to email the grader (Jack Greenoe — JLGreenoe{AT}elearning.swbts.edu) your 3,000-word web posts on hostile websites (including links to your posts) by Friday, December 4, 2009 at 12:00 noon. (3) You need to take the comprehensive in-class final on Monday, December 7, 2009 – the final is at the regular class time.
• Extra-credit: Attend faith-science conference taking place this week at Southwestern Seminary (for details go here) and, while there, get signatures inside an intelligent design book (preferably Stephen Meyer’s Signature in the Cell) from at least three conference speakers. Also, provide a one-paragraph review of the conference – which sessions you attended on which days, which session made the biggest impact on you and why; also, list the people who signed your intelligent design book. Hand in this review next class period. Depending on how much of the conference you attend, this can raise your grade by one-third of a letter (e.g., from a B to a B+). Extra-credit here, however, will not raise your grade from an A- to an A or from an A to an A+.
• Midterm Exam (take-home): click here for rtf version and click here for pdf version. Due Wednesday 10.21.09 at 12:00 noon as Word document emailed to the grader Jack Greenoe at JLGreenoe{AT}elearning.swbts.edu.
• CRITICAL REVIEW: Your critical review is due in hardcopy form in class on Monday of 11.30.09 — this is the last day of class. Also, you need to email it as a Word document no later than noon on that Monday to our grader Jack Greenoe (both of us will be grading the reviews). His email address is JLGreenoe{AT}elearning.swbts.edu. Please be sure to get confirmation that he received your review. Your review will be of Martin Gardner’s The Flight of Peter Fromm. It is to be 2,000 to 2,500 words in length. The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point for point, but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. Phillip Johnson is a master of such reviews: go hereherehere, and here. Alvin Plantinga’s review of Dawkins’s The God Delusion is also instructive: go here. For examples of critical reviews by William Dembski, go herehere, and here. You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture.
• Dear Class, I want to share with you a few things: (1) For extra credit I’d like you to go to SMU on September 24th. On that day there are two back-to-back events at SMU celebrating Darwin — go to smu.edu/smunews/darwin/events.asp and scroll down to September 24th. I don’t want you going there merely as spectators but will indicate in class how you might actively participate and engage the Darwin-lovers you’ll find there. (2) I keep trying to reach our grader, but so far with no success. I’m not hearing back from him by email or by phone, and his voicemail indicates he’s going to be incommunicado till September 21st. I don’t know why this should be. In any case, please keep working on the precis statements. They need to be turned in and you need to try your best, but I will cut you all some slack on the grading until we get into a regular routine. I’m sorry about this. (3) For me to email you all, I need to go through Blackboard, which lists my SWBTS address as my return email address. Please do NOT use this email address in contacting me. Instead, address ALL email correspondence to my designinference.com email address given in class. (4) Some people are emailing me précis statements. Please don’t. Your grade on these statements is based entirely on the hardcopy précis statements that you hand in at the start of class. (5) Although I asked for you to email me the executive summaries of yourselves, I also need hardcopy and it’s only by handing in the hardcopy that you will avoid losing points from your grade. I continue to await a number of these. –WmAD
• Regarding daily précis assignments, here’s what they need to contain: (1) your name, date, and course number; (2) a single summary sentence for each block of text in this week’s reading, no block exceeding 10 pages (thus a reading of 100 pages will require at least 10 précis sentences); (3) a burning/troubling/or otherwise important question to you raised by this week’s reading; (4) a sentence describing a key insight that you gained from this week’s reading; (5) the number of hours and minutes of undivided attention that you spent on this week’s reading along with your signature declaring that this number is accurate.
• Syllabus.

Intelligent Design or Unintelligent Evolution (SWBTS #PHILO 2483 – Fall 2009)
• Crossing the finish line: Here’s what’s involved in finishing out this course: (1) You need to hand in a hard-copy version of your critical review on Monday, November 30, 2009 in class. (2) You need to email the grader (Jack Greenoe — JLGreenoe{AT}elearning.swbts.edu) your 3,000-word web posts on hostile websites (including links to your posts) by Friday, December 4, 2009 at 12:00 noon. (3) You need to take the comprehensive in-class final on Monday, December 7, 2009 – the final is at the regular class time.
• Extra-credit: Attend faith-science conference taking place this week at Southwestern Seminary (for details go here) and, while there, get signatures inside an intelligent design book (preferably Stephen Meyer’s Signature in the Cell) from at least three conference speakers. Also, provide a one-paragraph review of the conference – which sessions you attended on which days, which session made the biggest impact on you and why; also, list the people who signed your intelligent design book. Hand in this review next class period. Depending on how much of the conference you attend, this can raise your grade by one-third of a letter (e.g., from a B to a B+). Extra-credit here, however, will not raise your grade from an A- to an A or from an A to an A+.
• Midterm Exam (take-home): click here for rtf version and click here for pdf version. Due Wednesday 10.21.09 at 12:00 noon as Word document emailed to the grader Jack Greenoe at JLGreenoe{AT}elearning.swbts.edu.
• CRITICAL REVIEW: Your critical review is due in hardcopy form in class on Monday of 11.30.09 — this is the last day of class. Also, you need to email it as a Word document no later than noon on that Monday to our grader Jack Greenoe (both of us will be grading the reviews). His email address is JLGreenoe{AT}elearning.swbts.edu. Please be sure to get confirmation that he received your review. Your review will be of Karl Giberson’s Saving Darwin. It is to be 2,000 to 2,500 words in length. The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point for point, but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. Phillip Johnson is a master of such reviews: go hereherehere, and here. Alvin Plantinga’s review of Dawkins’s The God Delusion is also instructive: go here. For examples of critical reviews by William Dembski, go herehere, and here. You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture.
• Dear Class, I want to share with you a few things: (1) For extra credit I’d like you to go to SMU on September 24th. On that day there are two back-to-back events at SMU celebrating Darwin — go to smu.edu/smunews/darwin/events.asp and scroll down to September 24th. I don’t want you going there merely as spectators but will indicate in class how you might actively participate and engage the Darwin-lovers you’ll find there. (2) I keep trying to reach our grader, but so far with no success. I’m not hearing back from him by email or by phone, and his voicemail indicates he’s going to be incommunicado till September 21st. I don’t know why this should be. In any case, please keep working on the precis statements. They need to be turned in and you need to try your best, but I will cut you all some slack on the grading until we get into a regular routine. I’m sorry about this. (3) For me to email you all, I need to go through Blackboard, which lists my SWBTS address as my return email address. Please do NOT use this email address in contacting me. Instead, address ALL email correspondence to my designinference.com email address given in class. (4) Some people are emailing me précis statements. Please don’t. Your grade on these statements is based entirely on the hardcopy précis statements that you hand in at the start of class. (5) Although I asked for you to email me the executive summaries of yourselves, I also need hardcopy and it’s only by handing in the hardcopy that you will avoid losing points from your grade. I continue to await a number of these. –WmAD
• Regarding daily précis assignments, here’s what they need to contain: (1) your name, date, and course number; (2) a single summary sentence for each block of text in this week’s reading, no block exceeding 10 pages (thus a reading of 100 pages will require at least 10 précis sentences); (3) a burning/troubling/or otherwise important question to you raised by this week’s reading; (4) a sentence describing a key insight that you gained from this week’s reading; (5) the number of hours and minutes of undivided attention that you spent on this week’s reading along with your signature declaring that this number is accurate.
• Syllabus.


Spring 2009

Intelligent Design (SOUTHERN EVANGELICAL SEMINARY #AP 410, 510, and 810; May 11 – 16, 2009)
• THE DUE DATE FOR ALL WORK IN THIS COURSE IS AUGUST 14, 2009. Here’s what you will need to do to wrap things up:

AP410       This is the undegrad course. You have three things to do: (1) take the final exam (worth 40% of your grade); (2) write a 3,000-word essay on the theological significance of intelligent design (worth 40% of your grade); (3) provide at least 10 posts defending ID that you’ve made on “hostile” websites, the posts totalling 2,000 words, along with the URLs (i.e., web links) to each post (worth 20% of your grade).

AP510       This is the masters course. You have four things to do: (1) take the final exam (worth 30% of your grade); (2) write a 1,500- to 2,000-word critical review of Francis Collins’s The Language of God – for instructions, see below (20% of your grade); (3) write a 3,000-word essay on the theological significance of intelligent design (worth 30% of your grade); (4) provide at least 10 posts defending ID that you’ve made on “hostile” websites, the posts totalling 3,000 words, along with the URLs (i.e., web links) to each post (worth 20% of your grade).

AP810       This is the D.Min. course. You have four things to do: (1) take the final exam (worth 30% of your grade); (2) write a 1,500- to 2,000-word critical review of Francis Collins’s The Language of God – for instructions, see below (20% of your grade); (3) write a 3,000-word essay on the theological significance of intelligent design (worth 30% of your grade); (4) develop a Sunday-school lesson plan based on the book Understanding Intelligent Design (worth 20% of your grade).

Note that the final exam is now available. Also, all materials for grading need to find their way into the hands of Prof. Jason L. Reed (email: jreed AT ses DOT edu).

• Those taking AP 510 and AP 810 for credit will be writing a 1,500- to 2,000-word critical review of Francis Collins’s The Language of God. Your reviews are due with the grader the last day of the term (for details about when and how to submit these reviews, stay tuned). The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point by point but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. Phillip Johnson is a master of such reviews: go hereherehere, and here. Alvin Plantinga’s review of Dawkins’s The God Delusion is also instructive: go here. For examples of critical reviews by William Dembski, go herehere, and here. You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture.
• William Dembski is visiting Southern Evangelical Seminary (www.ses.edu) to teach a 6-day intensive course on intelligent design from May 11th to May 16th, 2009. The course is geared toward three student audiences: college students (see syllabus for AP 410), masters students (see syllabus for AP 510), and D.Min. students (see syllabus for AP 810).

***

Christian Apologetics (SWBTS #PHILO 4373 – Spring 2009)
• HERE IS THE FINAL EXAM: click here for pdf version, click here for rtf version. Your completed exam is due with the grader at 12 noon tomorrow, May 7th, 2009.
• FINAL EXAM: The final will be a take-home exam. It will posted online on this very page (i.e., www.designinference.com under “teaching”) on May 6th at 12 noon and will be due with Jack Greenoe (JLGreenoe{AT}elearning.swbts.edu) as a Word document sent via email on May 7th at 12 noon. This 24-hour time period over which to work on the exam covers the actual exam time, which is Wednesday, May 6th from 1:00 to 2:50pm (see www.swbts.edu/finalexams). The final will be open book and should not take more than 2 to 3 hours to complete.
• CRITICAL REVIEW: Your critical reviews are due in hardcopy form in class Wednesday (04.29.09) – this is the last day of class. Also, you need to email them as a Word document no later than noon on Wednesday to our grader Jack Greenoe (both of us will be grading the papers). His email address is JLGreenoe{AT}elearning.swbts.edu. Please be sure to get confirmation that he received your review.
• EXTRA CREDIT: For those who think they need mercy on missed or poorly answered quizzes, please get Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and write a 750 to 1000 word reflection on lessons to be drawn from that book for Christian apologetics. You need to have spent at least 6 hours carefully reading the book and sign your name to that effect (i.e., your paper must include something like “I have spent at least six uninterrupted hours reading Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. –Jane Doe”). Alinsky’s book can be purchased from Amazon.com (you may need to use expedited shipping; click here for the Amazon.com listing). It should also be widely available in local libraries. This extra credit work is due May 7th at noon and must be emailed directly to me at my designinference.com address. Please make sure to confirm that I received it. Just what I do to improve your grade as a consequence of this exercise is at my discretion.
• Critical review assignment: Write a 2,000- to 2,500-word critical review of Martin Gardner’s The Flight of Peter Fromm – due last class meeting before final exam. The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point by point but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. For models of such reviews, download the following sample of critical reviews. For examples of critical reviews by Dr. Dembski, go herehere, and here.
• Midterm Study Topics: click here for pdf version.
• Syllabus.


Fall 2008

Christian Faith and Science (SWBTS #PHILO 4483 – Fall 2008)
• Final exam: pdf version and rtf version. The exam is due at 5:00pm on Wednesday, December 10, 2008, via an email attachment to our grader, Jack Greenoe (JLGreenoe{AT}elearning.swbts.edu – substitute @ for {AT}).
• Critical review assignment: Write a 2,000- to 2,500-word critical review of Francis Collins’s The Language of God – due last day of class. The skill in writing these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point by point but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and animating principle — and then to assess it critically. For models of such reviews, download the following sample of critical reviews.
• Syllabus.

Christian Faith, Knowledge, and Science (SWBTS #PHILO 7534 – Fall 2008)
• Critical review assignment: Write a 1,500- to 2,000-word critical review of the book or book chapters about which you will be giving a class presentation (the word-count is strict but excludes notes and bibliography, which you may not need). The skill in these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point by point but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and thrust — and then to assess it critically. For models of what such reviews, have a look at the following reviews I’ve written herehere, and here (in 1999 this last review won the Evangelical Press Association’s first place award in the category of “Critical Reviews”). You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture. As for references and other scholarly paraphernalia, keep a consistent style that provides all necessary information (I’m not worried about you following any particular style manual). Also, in an age of spelling and grammar checkers, I will count off on such mistakes. The review is due the day of your presentation.
• Syllabus.


Spring 2008

Christian Apologetics (SWBTS #PHILO 4373)
• Final Exam (take-home): click here for rtf version and click here for pdf version. Due Wednesday, 05.07.08 at 5:00 pm.
• Sample Critical Reviews.
• Midterm Study Questions: click here for rtf version and click here for pdf version.
• Syllabus.

Intelligent Design – Doctoral Seminar (SWBTS #PHILO 7544)
• Syllabus.


Fall 2007

Intelligent Design (SWBTS #PHILO 5483)
• TAKE-HOME FINAL: click here for rtf version and click here for pdf version. Due Thursday, December 13th by 12 noon.
• WRAPPING UP THE COURSE: There is no class meeting Monday, December 10th. The last two assignments — the review and the final — will need to be sent to me by email. The review is supposed to be in at 11:59pm on Monday, December 10th. The final will be placed online by 12noon on Tuesday, December 11th and needs to be emailed to me, completed, on Thursday, December 13th by 12 noon.
• Midterm Study Guide.
• Sample of critical reviews. Download the zip file at this link to see what I’m looking for in a critical review.
• Syllabus for this course.
• Syllabi for the upcoming academic year. Note that some courses here are new to Southwestern Seminary and thus have yet to receive an official course number.


Spring 2007

Critical Thinking (SWBTS #PHREL 5373 A)
• Part I of final exam (due 12 noon on Wednesday, May 9, 2007): pdf version and rtf version. Use the rtf version if you wish to intersperse your answers among the questions.
• FINAL EXAM: The final exam consists in two parts, both of which are due 12:00 noon on May 9, 2007: Part I – a comprehensive take-home test that needs to be emailed to my grader Jack Greenoe at JLGreenoe AT elearning DOT swbts DOT edu. The take-home test will be appear on this webpage by 12:00 noon on May 8, 2007. Part II – a 1,000 to 1,500 word critical review of “A War on Science”; the review needs to be emailed to me at wdembski AT designinference DOT com.
• Solutions to exercises 11 to 12.
• Sample Critical Reviews.
• Solutions to exercises 9 to 10.
• Solutions to exercises 7 to 8.
• The midterm will be a take-home exam in which you write a 1500- to 2000-word critical review of Richard Dawkins’s two-part video series against religion/ Christianity (For examples of critical reviews of books, go herehere, and here.) The word limit is absolute. Try to focus especially on Dawkins’s rhetorical moves to influence his viewers against religion. How skillful and effective is he? Where is his approach weak? The exam is open-book in the sense that you can use any books in the course as well as any other materials that you find useful. There is one exception, however, which is that I don’t want you looking at other reviews of this series (on the internet or elsewhere) or talking to fellow classmates about the exam. You can spend as much time working on this review as you like. But it is due in class as hardcopy on March 20, 2007.
• Solutions to exercises 4 to 6.
• Solutions to exercises 1 to 3.
• Syllabus.


Fall 2006

Christian Apologetics (SWBTS #PHREL 4373)
• Final take-home exam (due 10:00am Wednesday, 12.13.06): pdf version or rtf version.
• For the Richard Dawkins vs. David Quinn debate, go here.
• Several points of business: (1) Quizzes from now on will be in-class (this provides a better gauge of whether you are actually reading and understanding the material, and it allows me in good conscience to give you a more general essay-type final exam). (2) The critical review/term paper will be due last day of class (for examples of critical reviews, go herehere, and here; see also reviews in Books & Culture and First Things). (3) The final exam will be a two-hour in-class closed-book essay exam. There will be some general concept questions at the start (e.g., what is the difference between metaphysical and methodological naturalism) and some case-study questions at the end (for examples of the this type of question, go here).
• Quiz_10.10.06: There’s an extended footnote at the bottom of pages 178 and 179 of The Flight of Peter Fromm. Toward the end of that footnote Martin Gardner, in the person of Homer Wilson remarks, “But today’s Christians seem to have little curiosity about the early sources of their faith.” By early sources, here, Gardner is referring to the New Testament Apocrypha. How would you respond to Gardner’s criticism of Christians who dismiss the New Testament Apocrypha? Are we right to reject these writings as spurious and focus instead on the New Testament Canon as found in our Bibles? Please write a paragraph or two in response to this criticism by Gardner.
• Quiz_10.03.06 will be in-class.
• Quiz_9.26.06 was in-class. We discussed the answers after the quiz.
• Quiz_9.21.06, due at the beginning of class: Imagine that you are engaged in a public debate at a secular university with Thomas Nagle. Imagine further that Nagle has just uttered the quote at the top of p. 127 of Victor Reppert’s book. In a page or less indicate how, as a Christian apologist publicly debating Nagle, you would respond to his quote. Think especially of what you would want to say for the benefit of non-Christians listening in on your debate.
• Quiz_9.19.06 answers: Ques1 (the argument from reason) – the argument from reason attempts to undercut naturalism by showing that naturalism does not properly allow for reason and thus becomes self-refuting when one uses reason to argue for the truth of naturalism (with this argument, the devil is in the details); Ques2 (fideism) – fideism is the view that rational argumentation is irrelevant, if not counterproductive, to genuine faith.
• Quiz_9.14.06: pdf versionrtf versionAnswer key to this quiz.
• Quiz_09.07.06 was in-class. Answer key to this quiz.
• Quiz_09.04.06: pdf versionrtf versionAnswer key to this quiz.
• Quiz_08.31.06: pdf versionrtf versionAnswer key to this quiz.
• Syllabus.

Christian Faith, Knowledge, and Science (SWBTS #PHREL 7534)
• Critical review assignment: Write a 1,500- to 2,000-word critical review of the book or book chapters about which you will be giving a class presentation (the word-count is strict but excludes notes and bibliography, which you may not need). The skill in these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point by point but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and thrust — and then to assess it critically. For models of what such reviews, have a look at the following reviews I’ve written herehere, and here (in 1999 this last review won the Evangelical Press Association’s first place award in the category of “Critical Reviews”). You can also look at the reviews at First Things and at Books & Culture. As for references and other scholarly paraphernalia, keep a consistent style that provides all necessary information (I’m not worried about you following any particular style manual). Also, in an age of spelling and grammar checkers, I will count off on such mistakes. The review is due the day of your presentation.
• Syllabus.


Spring 2006

Critical Thinking and the Art of Argumentation (SBTS #28970)
• Solutions to exercises 11 to 12. Sorry it took so long to post these. Since exercises 13 to 14 were cancelled and since they won’t be figuring into the final (at least not directly) and since I’m very short on time, I probably won’t be posting these (as I had originally intended).
• As indicated in class and in the previous note, the final is to be a 2000-word critical review of Richard Dawkins’s 2-part series “The Root of All Evil?” (For examples of critical reviews see the previous note below.) The word limit is absolute. The exam is open-book in the sense that you can use any books in the course as well as any other materials that you find useful. There is one exception, however, which is that I don’t want you looking at other reviews of this series (on the internet or elsewhere) or talking to fellow classmates about the exam. You can spend as much time working on this review as you like. But it is due by midnight Eastern Standard Time on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 as an email attachment sent to me at the following email address: wdembski AT designinference DOT com (my SBTS email account has in the past proven unreliable for such assignments). If you need to view the series again and don’t have it readily available, Jiri Prochazka is on campus and will be able to assist you (his email address is: chrochy AT hotmail DOT com).
• The final will be a take-home exam in which you will do a critical review of Richard Dawkins’s two-part series against religion/Christianity titled “The Root of All Evil?” (For examples of critical reviews of books, go herehere, and here.) We’ll view this series in class on Monday, 4.24.06, at which time I’ll give you details about the exam. I have yet to put up the remaining exercises to Murphy. I will do that as soon as time allows, though it’s not so crucial given the focus of the final.
• Solutions to exercises 9 to 10.
• Solutions to exercises 7 to 8.
• Midterm take-home exam (due at beginning of class Monday, 3.13.06): pdf version or rtf version.
• Please print off my Primer on Probability, read it, and bring it to class on Monday, 3.13.06.
• The mid-term exam on will be posted on this page by 12:00 noon on Friday, 3.10.06. I had intended to provide a study guide, but since this will be a 1-hour open-book exam, I don’t see much need for this. Familiarity with the readings and exercises, however, will be important because even though it’s an open-book exam, unless you know what’s what and where, you’ll be wasting an inordinate amount of time hunting for answers and thus be unable to answer all the questions. Our main text is Nancey Murphy’s book and you’ll want to know what’s there as well as be able to do the exercises. The exam will only focus on chapters 1 to 6 of that book. With regard to the Laws of Power, know Laws 1–18. With regard to Corbett, focus on pages 1-141 but don’t worry about syllogisms (as I indicated, these are best handled in a course on basic symbolic logic [specifically, propositional and quantificational logic], e.g., Henry Gensler’s Introduction to Logic). Once the exam appears online, using the allotted space type in your answers in the rtf version or else write in your answers in the pdf version. Hand in your exams at class on Monday, 3.13.06.
• Solutions to exercises 5 to 6.
• Solutions to exercises 1 to 4.
• Syllabus.

A Primer on Intelligent Design (SBTS #28677)
• Here is the final for this course: pdf document. It is due May 10, 2006 with Keith Goad (see first page of exam for details).
• The final will be an open-book take-home exam to be submitted electronically to Keith Goad, my Garrett fellow (for the type of exam you’re looking at, go here).
• Study questions for midterm exam (closed book) that will be giving Monday 3.27.06 at the beginning of class: pdf document.
• Paper assignment: Write a 2,000- to 2,500-word critical review of Forrest and Gross’s Creationism’s Trojan Horse (the word-count is strict but excludes notes and bibliography). The skill in these reviews is not to summarize the whole book point by point but rather to uncover its essence — its main argument and thrust — and then to assess it critically. For models of what such reviews might look like, have a look at the following reviews I’ve written herehere, and here (in 1999 this last review won the Evangelical Press Association’s first place award in the category of “Critical Reviews”). As for references and other scholarly paraphernalia, keep a consistent style that provides all necessary information (I’m not worried about you following any particular style manual). Also, in an age of spelling and grammar checkers, I will count off on such mistakes. This paper is due the last day of class: April 24, 2006.
• Syllabus.


Fall 2005

Christian Doctrine and the Natural Sciences (SBTS #28960)
• Final Exam for Course #28960. This is an open-book take-home exam due midnight on Friday, December 2, 2005.
• Midterm Exam Study Questions Fall 2005. Study questions for course #28960.
• Syllabus.

Scientific Approach: The World and Christian Faith (SBTS #85320)
• Syllabus.

Comments on this entry are closed.