This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Philosophy: Religion High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophy of religion Atheism Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of atheism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismTemplate:WikiProject AtheismAtheism articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. For more information and how you can help, click the [Show] link opposite: If you would like to participate, you can edit this article and visit the project page. Quick help Project's main talk page Article layout Links to atheism-related information · List of free online resources Writing about religion · Article development Citing sources · Verifying sources · About original research Assume good faith · Be civil Recent activity Core articles the "Atheism" article Articles recently added to Category:Atheism To do edit history watch purge Join WikiProject atheism and be bold. Add a userbox to your page (((User WikiProject Atheism)) or ((User WPA2))) and attract potential members. Help with articles. See this month's adopt-an-article. Help out with this to-do list. Be consistent Use a "standard" layout for atheism-related articles (see layout style, "The perfect article" and Featured articles). Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use ((WikiProject Atheism)) or see info box) Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether [[Category:Atheism]] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it. Maintenance, etc. Find sources for all positions of an article (see Citing sources and atheism references). Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process). Watch the list of atheism-related articles and add to accordingly. Always write for an encyclopedia. Articles to improve Agnosticism Create Articles on notable atheists Expand an atheism stub Immediate attention State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments. False choice into False dilemma: discuss whether you are for or against this merge here Clarify references in Atheism using footnotes. Secular movement defines it as a being restricted to America in the 21st century. Religion Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Theology Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present.

What is the "first PO cause argument"? We need to be told Myrvin (talk) 20:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded by Cowtowne - that phrase is entirely OBSCURE as demonstrated by Mr Google here:

 http :// bit .ly /71I8Dq   Accept my apology, my prose is

jabbery. Maybe clever, or perhaps quite a brickhead... Initial theory is the two letters "PO" are spurious, typos, and stand for nothing. Why's this error unfixed for five months, when it is the leading sentence of a complex, erudite, pedantic synopsis.

 http :// bit.ly /52yUhU  (redact teh spaces) 

=> revised theory; and a workable conclusion. "PO" has no context. Inclusion of undeclared abbreviations is surely ill-advised. Perhaps... PM =Prime Mover. Because this article appears to be unattended... it will get some TLC with this micro-tweak from me. ( sorry if this oversteps the protocol... alas, you are duly notified herein) So much for the 35minutes wasted upon this glimmer of incomplete scholarship which was confounding. Ciao from Cowe Cowtowne (talk) 04:22, 24 December 2009 (UTC)≈[reply]

There would seem to be a good deal of overlap with Philosophical theology William M. Connolley (talk) 23:20, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, part of the (unsourced, btw) text reads: "Theologians, distinct from philosophers of religion, often consider the existence of God as axiomatic or self-evident and explain, justify or support religious claims by rationalization or intuitive metaphors." However, looking at the list of philosophers of religion, a great deal of them are theologians - and famous ones at that. In other words: It appears fairly meaningless to try and make such a sharp division between theologians and philosophers of religion, unless you want to remove the designation of philosopher of religion from such characters as Augustine of Hippo or St. Thomas Aquinas, who may fit the category of philosophical theology anyway.Mojowiha (talk) 22:22, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I could see this article being merged with theology, as the theology article notes "Richard Hooker defined 'theology' in English as 'the science of things divine,' [...] Theologians use various forms of analysis and argument [...] to help understand, explain, test, critique, defend or promote any of myriad religious topic" and that theology may "challenge (ex. biblical criticism) or oppose (ex. irreligion) a religious tradition or the religious world-view."

I could imagine a possible form of article that needs to remain separate, but the current form reads like a POV-fork of theology.

Ian.thomson (talk) 22:44, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to rewrite this with refs. Myrvin (talk) 23:32, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The text here seems too closely related to its single source, section 2 of Hiddenness of God at Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:20, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article about "Philosophical theology" presents an intellectual argument put forward seemingly largely by one individual Mortimer J. Adler, about the nature of the philosophy of religion - attempting to draw a distinction between what he calls "philosophical theology" by religious outsiders, such as Aristotle, and Natural theology, by insiders. Its most appropriate place would likely be as a much-contracted entry in the philosophy of religion article (and possibly as a mentioned criticism on the Natural theology page. As it stands, having an article entitled Philosophical theology provides significant scope for confusion with the Philosophy of religion and Religious philosophy pages to the extent that casual readers could readily be confused. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:08, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Merge into "theology" — The article is nothing more than a case of hyperfragmentation of knowledge; Wikipedia is not Wiktionary.--Æo (talk) 12:32, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not merge - Philosophical theology is like philosophical anthropology, philosophical psychology, or philosophical cosmology: it's a specifically philosophical take on an otherwise independent field of inquiry. The term is used in this sense to denote the theological thinking of, e.g., Aristotle, Chrysippus, Plotinus, or Avicenna. This is something quite different from philosophy of religion, religion not being an independent field of inquiry, nor a traditional subject of philosophical thinking. I'm not sure in what context the term philosophy of religion is normally used, but it seems to be a broad category of philosophical thinking about many subjects touching upon religion (the nature of good and evil, the demarcation between religion and science, etc.). This is wholly different from philosophical theology, which endeavors to answer the simple question: what is god? This question, and the answers given by philosophers such as the ones I've mentioned, are normally taken to be independent of religion: it's a purely rational/speculative take on God, without reference to scriptural authority. Although it shares this latter feature with natural theology, the difference is that while natural theology is a form of religious apologetics geared towards proving the existence of God, philosophical theology is always embedded within a broader philosophical framework, from which it tries to formulate a coherent answer to the philosophical question as to the nature of God. It's true that our current Philosophical theology article is in a bad state, but this topic does without a doubt deserve its own, separate article. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 23:10, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not merge - Demarcating between these topics is a thorny one, and arguing where the lines are between philosophy of religion and philosophical theology is a debate philosophers and theologians, both religious and not, have been having for a very long time (see, for instance, sections 1 and 3 of Philosophy and Christian Theology in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy for a very short synopsis of that debate). The previous version of the Stanford article also notes that there is a historical aspect to this—for much of the twentieth century, there was a fairly strict separation between philosophy and theology, but among many philosophers with an interest in theological questions, there isn't such a clear boundary anymore. Wikipedia will not resolve this: talk pages are good for many things, but they will not be the venue where a definitive demarcation of academic fields is developed. Instead, I'd suggest this—go and have a look at the table of contents for The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion and then do the same with The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Theology, and notice that they do not cover the same area. Institutionally, the sort of things discussed in the Philosophical Theology are not the sort of thing taught to philosophy students in their intro to philosophy of religion courses (at least in England) but are the sort of things discussed in theology lectures. I'd agree with Apaugasma that the Philosophical Theology article on WP needs _a lot_ of work (not least to cover non-Christian philosophical theology), but merging doesn't fix that. —Tom Morris (talk) 18:43, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Closing, with no merge. Klbrain (talk) 00:39, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]