Matching Items (15)
Filtering by
- Status: Published
Description
This project examines and challenges the West's generally accepted two category approach to the world's belief systems. That is, it will deconstruct the religion / science `paradigm' that has developed over the past two centuries. It will argue that the dichotomy between the two categories was created by modernity for the purpose of establishing an exclusive view believed to be based on knowledge. This exclusive view, philosophical naturalism (science), was set in opposition to all alternative views identified as religion. As the exclusive view, though constructed on a defective foundation of knowledge, philosophical naturalism, nonetheless, became the privileged interpreter and explainer of reality in the academy of the Western world.
As a work in the area of epistemology and the philosophy of religion, this project will challenge philosophical naturalism's claim to knowledge. The approach will be philosophical and historical critically assessing both modernity's and postmodernity's basis for knowledge. Without a rational basis for exclusive knowledge the popular dichotomy dissolves. The implications of this dissolution for `religious studies' will be addressed by offering an alternative scheme that provides a more plausible way to divide the world's belief systems.
As a work in the area of epistemology and the philosophy of religion, this project will challenge philosophical naturalism's claim to knowledge. The approach will be philosophical and historical critically assessing both modernity's and postmodernity's basis for knowledge. Without a rational basis for exclusive knowledge the popular dichotomy dissolves. The implications of this dissolution for `religious studies' will be addressed by offering an alternative scheme that provides a more plausible way to divide the world's belief systems.
ContributorsTussing, Rodney W (Author) / Cady, Linell (Committee member) / Anderson, Owen (Committee member) / Gereboff, Joel (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
The need for a critical education in a democracy, its difficulties, and how to reform this field requires urgent attention. This project begins with the premise that education is necessary for a vibrant democracy. While examining differing voices that advocate for educational reform, mainly that of Critical Pedagogy, it is shown how conflicting forms are advocating similar ideals. Henry Giroux and David Horowitz, both reformers that are on opposite sides of the political spectrum appear to have similar goals. Yet, the question becomes how to solve these differences between these parties? By examining the philosophical origins of these projects and explicating differences rooted in human nature and the good, the basic differences can begin to be shown. In showing these differences it requires going back to the work of Kant. Kant shows the necessity of beginning with philosophy and examining basic assumptions in order to begin to critique and build an education that would guarantee equality.
ContributorsNolen, Matthew (Author) / Wise, Greg (Thesis advisor) / Anderson, Owen (Committee member) / Ramsey, Ramsey (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
Given the success of science, weak forms of mind-brain dependence are commonly treated as uncontroversial within contemporary philosophies of mind. More controversial are the different metaphysical claims inferred from this dependence, many ascribing ontological priority to the brain. Consider the following three propositions: (i) neurological events are essentially identified by their role in material systems, laws, and causes that are constitutively non-rational; (ii) at least some mental events are essentially identified in virtue of their role in the use of reason; (iii) all mental events are realized by, identical to, or composed out of, neurological events. (i) is uncontroversial. However, (iii) is strictly materialistic. (i), (ii) and (iii) taken together appear incoherent. A fruitful task for philosophy is to resolve this apparent incoherence. In his 1997 book The Last Word Thomas Nagel offers an explication of reason that conceptually transcends the nature of material substrate. In his 2010 article "Modest Dualism" Tyler Burge offers reasons to think of propositional thought as irreducible to the concepts of the material sciences. Both focus on rationality as a unique form of intentionality. Both philosophers also reject materialism (iii). On their accounts it's reasonable to take 'rational intentionality' as exhibiting a logical priority of the mind with respect to the brain in inquiries into the nature of mind. Granting this, the diminished conception of mind presupposed by prevailing contemporary theories is seen to be the result of a more general failure to recognize the logical priority and intricate nature of rationality. The robust views of rationality expressed by Nagel and Burge constitute grounds for argument against even the weakest form of materialism. I develop such an argument in this thesis, showing that the propositional attitudes exhibited in thought and speech preclude all materialistic notions of mind. Furthermore, I take the nature of propositional attitudes to suggest a perspective for exploring the fundamental nature of mind, one that focuses not on composition but on rational powers.
ContributorsGoodrich, Gregory (Author) / Kobes, Bernard W (Thesis advisor) / White, Michael J. (Committee member) / Anderson, Owen (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
This study examines how a populist religious leader, Alexander Campbell, altered the economic value system of religious material production in the early United States and, subsequently, the long-term value structure of religious economic systems generally. As religious publishing societies in the early nineteenth century were pioneering the not-for-profit corporation and as many popular itinerants manufactured religious spectacles around the country, Campbell combined the promotional methods of revivalism and the business practices of religious printers, with a conspicuously pugilistic tone to simultaneously build religious and business empires. He was a religious entrepreneur who capitalized on the opportunities of American revivalism for personal and religious gain. His opponents attacked his theology and his wealth as signs of his obvious error but few were prepared for the vigor of his answer. He invited conflict and challenged prominent opponents to grow his celebrity and extend his brand into new markets. He argued that his labor as a printer was deserving of compensation and that, unlike his “venal” clerical opponents, he offered his services as a preacher for free. As Americans in the early national period increasingly felt obligated to find the “right kind of Christianity,” Campbell packaged and sold a compelling product. In the decades that followed his first debate in 1820, he built a religious following that by 1850 numbered well over 100,000 followers. This dissertation considers the importance of marketing, promotion, investment capital, distribution networks, property law, print culture, and ideology, to the success of a given religious prescription in the nineteenth century American marketplace of religion. Campbell’s success reveals important social, political, and economic structures in the nineteenth century trans-Appalachian west. It also illuminates a form of religious entrepreneurialism that continues to be important to American Christianity.
ContributorsDupey, James (Author) / O'Donnell, Catherine (Thesis advisor) / Critchlow, Donald (Committee member) / Fessenden, Tracy (Committee member) / Schermerhorn, Calvin J (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
Political polarization is the coalescence of political parties -- and the individuals of which parties are composed -- around opposing ends of the ideological spectrum. Political parties in the United States have always been divided, however, in recent years this division has only intensified. Recently, polarization has also wound its way to the Supreme Court and the nomination processes of justices to the Court. This paper examines how prevalent polarization in the Supreme Court nomination process has become by looking specifically at the failed nomination of Judge Merrick Garland and the confirmations of now-Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. This is accomplished by comparing the ideologies and qualifications of the three most recent nominees to those of previous nominees, as well as analysing the ideological composition of the Senate at the times of the individual nominations.
ContributorsJoss, Jacob (Author) / Hoekstra, Valerie (Thesis director) / Critchlow, Donald (Committee member) / Computer Science and Engineering Program (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05
Description
Since the passage of the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974 (FECA) up until the most recent election in 2012, presidential campaign funds have risen over five hundred percent. While money has always been an essential and critical part of any political campaign, this rise has been drastic and continues to increase at a higher rate with every election cycle, even when the numbers are adjusted for inflation. The purpose of this paper is to examine this continuous increase in cost of presidential campaigns and to analyze the different pieces that have contributed to this rise. The main pieces include two Supreme Court cases: Buckley v. Valeo and Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission, the rise and fall of federally regulated public funding and the various pieces of a presidential campaign that have considerably higher ticket prices with each election cycle. This paper first goes through both Buckley and Citizens, describing what each Supreme Court decision did and how they effected how much money can be spent in a presidential campaign and by whom. The paper then examines each presidential election since the passage of FECA in 1974 through the last election with President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in 2012. Each election cycle is broken down to show how much money was spent by each candidate and the Republican and Democratic National Committees, whether or not the money was received through public funds or raised privately, and subsequently the percentages of where the money was spent. While the examination of the Court cases helps to understand why so much money can be donated and contributed directly to campaigns or spent on behalf of a presidential candidate, the breakdown of where the money is spent including advertising, travel, staff salaries etc. helps to show why a presidential campaign costs over five hundred percent more today than it did forty years ago. By understanding this increase, how it was caused and where the money is going, it is more feasible to comprehend whether or not campaign finance reform should be proposed and if so, how it should be brought about.
ContributorsColby, Mikaela Nicole (Author) / Critchlow, Donald (Thesis director) / Shair-Rosenfield, Sarah (Committee member) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-05
Description
The abortion debate has been a heated topic since the early 1970's when the monumental case, Roe v. Wade was decided. Roe v. Wade, along side of it's sister case Doe v. Bolton, ruled that no law restricting abortion could be passed and set the precedent that life did not exist before birth. Before this time, people were largely unaware of what life inside the womb looked like and therefore had no reason to believe that life truly began at conception. As medical technology has revealed more about life inside the womb, the pro-life movement has been tasked with the uphill battle to shift the discussion around the topic. Because people now spend so much time using various forms of technology, it has become an effective way for groups and organizations to come in contact with large amounts of people. This is something the pro-life group has not only done, but has excelled at. By successfully utilizing advancing technology combined with new medical tools and discoveries, the pro-life movement has successfully gained an increasingly large momentum and following in a relatively short amount of time. Recognizing that technology alone does not have the ability to change people's hearts, but must be backed up with arguments and strong evidence, this paper will explore the medical advances that helped drive pro-life arguments, the technological advances that have become a platform to disseminate this information, and ways the pro-life movement has utilized each new form of technology. Lastly, this paper will explore the amount of growth the pro-life movement has experienced since the early 1970's. In the end, the pro-life movement has successfully combined all these different advances to create a movement that has reached a vast audience and gained exponential awareness and momentum. They have used everything from social media, the Internet, and videos to spread the truth about abortion. As a result, minds are being changed, people are driven into action, and babies are being saved.
ContributorsSnyder, Lorne Lynn (Author) / Critchlow, Donald (Thesis director) / Anderson, Owen (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Department of Supply Chain Management (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2014-12
Description
The thesis reviews the historiography of American Populism in the late 19th century, through an evaluation of Richard Hofstadter’s thesis presented in The Age of Reform and The Paranoid Style in American Politics. Though Hofstadter related the Populist movement to proto-fascism, racism, paranoia, and jingoism, many historians before and after the publication of The Age of Reform have objected and presented a more positive view of Populism. By examining the lives and careers of three of Hofstadter’s primary examples of Populists—Mary Lease, Ignatius Donnelly, and Thomas E. Watson—the author proves that Hofstadter’s own evidence does not support his thesis. Though Hofstadter is certainly correct about some aspects of the Populist movement, including their tendency to engage in conspiracy, his claim that Populism is heavily characterized by racism is not borne out by the facts. The Populists studied are each unique individuals, with their own eccentricities and deviances from the larger Populist movement, and each must be considered within the context of their own lives and their own time. In the case of Tom Watson, for instance, Hofstadter’s quotes date to a point in Watson’s life where his beliefs could no longer be considered representative of the Populist movement. Major parts of Hofstadter’s evidence—including Mary Lease’s The Problem of Civilization Solved—were not influential or widely read within the Populist movement. The paper attempts to sort out what parts of Hofstadter’s evidence are valid, what parts are divorced from their proper context, and which parts are contrary to his actual thesis, through the format of three biographical chapters.
ContributorsBonfiglio, Anthony Harris (Author) / Barth, Jonathan (Thesis director) / Critchlow, Donald (Committee member) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies (Contributor, Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor, Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
The Renewal Philosophy thesis project consisted of two parts: the creation of a website for Dr. Anderson's Renewal Philosophy project and the development of four videos to be used in Dr. Anderson's classes at Arizona State University. The project includes a written description of the processes and methods used in the completion of the website and videos.
ContributorsMarsh, Caleb (Author) / Anderson, Owen (Thesis director) / Fitzsimmons Burton, Kelly (Committee member) / School of the Arts, Media and Engineering (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
ABSTRACT The origins of School Choice in the United States can be predominantly attributed to Milton Friedman's 1955 essay, "The Role of Government in Education." Since that time, the idea of leveling the educational playing field with a free market approach has been championed by conservatives and abhorred by liberals. Currently, there is overwhelming evidence to support the fact that public schools are failing today's youth and are not providing them with the tools to succeed post-high school graduation. Many policymakers have attempted to improve the education system by increasing the options available to parents. Today, that choice comes in the form of charter schools, Education Savings Accounts (ESAs), Vouchers, and Tax-Credit Scholarships (STOs). Each of these mechanisms seeks to empower families to make the best decision for their child, yet each comes with its own set of advantages and disadvantages. Fraud and abuse plague every system and School Choice is not immune to such problems. However, the root concept at the core of school choice - that every child should have to opportunity to attend any school of their choosing, whether public, private, or charter - is fundamentally positive for society. The concept of School Choice is a noble and intelligent solution to the complex task of educating millions of youth across the United States. However, the process must be properly executed, through ESAs and Vouchers, to truly promote access and opportunity for all. Specifically, in Arizona, tax credit programs should be phased out in lieu of more efficient programs readily available. If this is not achieved, then School Choice becomes just another piece in an already dysfunctional puzzle.
ContributorsPemberton, Ivan (Author) / Critchlow, Donald (Thesis director) / Barth, Jonathan (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05