Or We Can Be Philosophers: A Response to Barbara Forrest

Last updated on: March 13, 2015 at 1:29 pm by Francis J. Beckwith

Or We Can Be Philosophers: A Response to Barbara Forrest 2015-03-13T13:29:56-04:00 Francis J. Beckwith

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

That is the title of an article of mine that is forthcoming in the philosophy journal, Synthese. It is, however, now available online prior to its appearance in print. (It may be downloaded by individual purchase or if you or your institution has a subscription). Here is how my article begins (references omitted):

When I came across Professor Barbara Forrest’s “analysis” of my work when it first appeared online in Spring 2009…, I was surprised that a philosopher of my modest accomplishments should be the subject of an entire article in such an esteemed journal. My moment of honor, however, was short lived once I began reading it. I soon discovered that Ms. Forrest’s interest in me goes far beyond my academic work, but in to my entire career and then some, including my friendships, my civic associations, the locations of my speaking engagements, my Church, and the political histories of groups and organizations that people with whom I disagree and who I have never met and do not know once belonged.

One is immediately struck by the article’s strange style of philosophical reflection, one that seems out of place in this revered periodical. It is, to be sure, a lengthy article (49 pp.), which would make it a philosophically interesting piece if size matters. But on philosophical questions, what matters is the quality of one’s argument, the clarity of one’s language, the accuracy of one’s depictions of the views with which one is interacting, and the charity by which one engages these views. On these criteria, Forrest’s assessment of my work is a professional embarrassment. So much so that the editors of this journal—not to be confused with the editors of the “special issue” in which Forrest’s article appears—have done something unprecedented: they have included in the front of the issue a disclaimer…. They have distanced themselves from her literary misconduct, her article’s personal attacks and bizarre tangents into my religious pilgrimage that surround and embed her case against my work. As much as I do not deserve Forrest’s attempt at character assassination, I surely do not deserve the generosity of the Synthese editors. For in the grand world of academic philosophy, I am a minor figure, who, to be sure, has been blessed to be part of a first-class philosophy department at an outstanding university.

My task of responding is made more difficult by the fact that Forrest’s 49-page article is at many points nearly incomprehensible. She cites, quotes from, and misrepresents works of mine published over a 23 year period, from when I was 24 years-old until the age of 47 (I am presently 50); she compares and contrasts works, composed sometimes decades apart, that are dealing with different issues in different disciplines at different levels of abstraction and written for diverse audiences, including professional philosophers, theologians, legal scholars, Christian lay persons, etc.; and she often writes longish paragraphs that include a lot of controversial assertions that she presents as uncontested truths, and quotes from assorted writers whose work she often misunderstands or misrepresents, but with no actual arguments (or at least none that one can immediately recognize).

There really is no easy way to remedy this problem, though it is, happily, not my problem. It is Forrest’s. I have no obligation to provide clarity, rigor, and coherence to an article that lacks all three and that I did not author. But what I will do is the only thing I can do: offer in my response a critical assessment of a few examples of Forrest’s work and trust that the interested reader will go back and read her article to fully appreciate the severity of her philosophical malfeasance.

Here is how the article ends:

At the end of the day, my assessment of Forrest’s article… is about how we, as philosophers, ought to conduct our disagreements in public, especially when they touch on those questions that arise from what John Rawls calls our “comprehensive doctrines”… We have a choice. We can take our cue from Forrest, and a few of her compatriots higher up on the philosophical food chain, and continue to escalate and amplify our inflammatory rhetoric, falsely depicting our adversaries as sinister subversives looking to usher in a totalitarian regime committed to either theocracy or atheocracy. Or we can be philosophers.

You can download the entire article here. (Subscription required)

Here is the article’s abstract:

This article is a response to Barbara Forrest’ 2011 Synthese article, “On the Non-Epistemology of Intelligent Design.” Forrest offers an account of my philosophical work that consists almost entirely of personal attacks, excursions into my religious pilgrimage, and misunderstandings and misrepresentations of my work as well as of certain philosophical issues. Not surprisingly, the Synthese editors include a disclaimer in the front matter of the special issue in which Forrest’s article was published. In my response, I address three topics: (1) My interest in Intelligent Design (ID) and public education and why as a Thomist I have grown more skeptical and explicitly critical of ID over the years, (2) the sorts of philosophical mistakes with which Forrest’s article is teeming, and (3) my Christian faith, religious exclusivism, and interfaith dialogue.

Philosophy

Philosophy of Religion

intelligent design

Philosophy

Previous Post

March 5, 2011

Will Herberg's 1949 "Commentary" review of Paul Blanshard's notorious "American Freedom and Catholic Power"

Next Post

March 11, 2011 Powerful words: Romans 12:9-21 and the Christian life

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2010 Election 2012 2012 Election Abortion Academic freedom Academic Freedom Alliance Affirmative Action Al Mohler Alvin Plantinga Amazon.com American Culture Animal Rights Anti-Catholic Bigotry Antichrist apologetics Apostolic Succession Appearance Aristotle Ash Wednesday atheism Baptists Barack Obama basketball Baylor Best Books Bias Biden Billy Joel bioethics Bishop Gorman High School Bishop Robert Barron blogging Bob Dylan books C. S. Lewis Called to Communion Calvin College Calvinism Cancel culture Casey v. Planned Parenthood Catholic Catholic Answers Catholic saints Catholic Social Thought Catholic World Report Catholicism China Christianity Christianity Today Christians Christmas Christopher Hitchens Chuck Colson Church Fathers Church of England communion of the saints Conclave Confirmation Conservatism Constitutional Law contraception conversion stories Cornel West Critical Race Theory Culture of Death Culture of Life Daddy's Little Girl Darby Beckwith David Boonin David Crowder David Novak Defending Life DEI Dinesh D'Souza Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Dr. Tod Worner E. O. Wilson Easter Edgardo Mortara Edith Schaeffer Elizabeth Beckwith Emergent Church Emily Edmondson Epistemology Equality Eric Metaxas Ethics Evangelical Philosophical Society Evangelical Theological Society Evangelicalism Evangelicals Evangelium Vitae EWTN faith and reason Falkirk Center family Federalist Society feminism Film First Amendment First Things Football Fr. Robert Barron Francis A. Schaeffer Frank Capra Frankie Beckwith God Good Friday Gospel Coalition Grateful Dead Gratitude Greg Koukl Ground Zero Mosque Hadley Arkes Harold Joseph Beckwith Harverford College Hell Higher Education Hillary Clinton Hobby Lobby Houston Baptist University Humanities humor Integralism intelligent design Internal Revenue Service Islam It's a Wonderful Life Ivy League J. Budziszewski Jesus Movement Jimmy Akin Jimmy Stewart Joe Dickerson John F. Kennedy John Gerstner John J. Haldane John Locke John Rawls Journeys of Faith Judaism Judith Jarvis Thomson Justification Keith Green Keith Whittington King James Version Las Vegas Latter-day Saints Laura Nyro Law Lawrence Ferlinghetti Levon Helm Liberalism Liberty University Lou Reed Lutheranism Malcolm & Alwyn Marriage Martin Luther Mary the Mother of God Media Media appearances Michael Licona Michael Ruse Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Mike Huckabee Mike Krzyzewski Miracles MIT Mitt Romney monozygotic twinning Moral Theology Mormonism music N. T. Wright Natural Law New Books Network New Evangelization new word New York Times Newt Gingrich Newtown Massacre Nicholas Wolterstorff Norman L. Geisler Note Dame Notre Dame NSA spying O. Carter Snead Papal Conclave Papal Conclave 2013 Passover Pat Robertson Patheos Penance Personhood Philosophy Philosophy of Religion Planned Parenthood Political Correctness Political Liberalism politics Politics for Christians Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul I Pope John Paul II Pope John XXIII Pope Leo XII Pope Paul VI Pope Pius XII Prayer in Schools President Barack Obama President Bill Clinton President Ronald W. Reagan Princeton Problem of Evil Prolife Protestantism Providence College Public Discourse Publications Publishing Purgatory R. C. Sproul Racism Ralph Wood RCIA Real Presence Reformation relativism relics Religion religious art Religious Liberty Religious urban legends Republican Party Resurrection Return to Rome Reversion Rhetoric Richard Dawkins Richard Mouw Rick Santorum Riley Beckwith Robert P. George Rod Dreher Roe v. Wade Roger Olson Ronald Dworkin Ronald W. Reagan Rush Limbaugh Russell Moore Ryan T. Anderson Sanctity of Life Satan Sexual Ethics Sexual misconduct Snoop Dogg Social Justice South Park Southern Baptists Speaking Engagement Speech St. Augustine St. Francis of Assisi St. Peter's Catholic Student Center St. Thomas Aquinas St. Thomas More stained glass Stand to Reason Stanford Stephen H. Webb Studies in Christian Ethics Super Bowl LV Syllabus The Band The Beatles The Bible The Catholic Thing the Christian university The City The King's College The Moral Argument The Sacraments The Vatican theology Theology of the Body Thomas Aquinas Thomas Nagel Thomas S. Hibbs Thomistic Institute Tim Challies Timothy George Tolerance Tony Sclafani Transubstantiation Trump U. S. Supreme Court Uncategorized University Faculty for Life University of Dallas UNLV Vatican Virtual Book Burning Volokh Conspiracy Walker Percy William F. Buckley William Lane Craig Wokeness Word of Fire

Select a Month August 2025 June 2025 March 2025 February 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 July 2024 April 2024 March 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 January 2023 October 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 September 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 October 2015 August 2015 July 2015 May 2015 April 2015 July 2014 April 2014 March 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many chapters are in the Book of Romans?

Select your answer to see how you score.

12 18 16 14