Roy Clouser is professor of philosophy and religion (Emeritus) at the College of New Jersey. He holds an BA from Gordon College, a B.D. from Reformed Episcopal Seminary, and an M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania. Along the way to the Ph.D. he studied with Paul Tillich at Harvard Graduate School and with Herman Dooyeweerd at the Free University of Amsterdam. In 1997 he won one of the Templeton Awards for his course in science and religion. He is the author of The Myth of Religious Neutrality (University of Notre Dame Press, revised 2005), Knowing with the Heart (IVP, 1999), and numerous articles.
Articles
2007. A third view of rights and law: A critique of assumptions behind the Declaration and the Constitution
The 13th Annual Kuyper Lecture for 2007, Harvard Law School 18th October 2007
Sponsored by the Centre for Public Justice
2007. A blue print for a non-reductionist theory of reality.
2006. "Genesis regained" paper presented at the Templeton Science and Religion Conference June 2006, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
2006. Prospects for Theistic Science. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, March 2006. [pdf]
Le Morvan, Pierre. Clouser's Definition of Religious Belief Itself Religiously Neutral PSCF 58:1
Ratzsch, Del. On Reducing Nearly Everything to Reductionism,PSCF 58: 1
Clouser, Roy Replies to the Comments of Le Morvan, Halvorson, and Ratzsch on Prospects for Theistic Science
Clouser, Roy. Author's Reply to Two Letters Regarding Prospects for Theistic Science (PSCF 58, no. 1 [2006]: 2-15; PSCF 58, no. 3 [2006]: 253-4; and PSCF 58, no. 3 [2006]: 254-5), 58:4, 333, D 2006.
2003. Reason and Belief in God. Philosophia Reformata, June.
2003. Is there a Christian view of Everything from Soup to Nuts?. Pro Rege, June, 2003.
2002. "Social norms and religious belief"
2001. Theism Compatible with Evolution?. In Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives, Ed. Rob Pennock. (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001), 513&ndash536.
2001. Three Watersheds of Biblical Interpretation. In Marginal Resistance: Essays dedicated to John Vander Stelt (Dordt College Press, 2001)
1999. Is God Eternal? In The Rationality of Theism, Ed. A.G. Sienra. (Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi Publishers, 1999), 273-299.
1999. Is the Death Penalty Viable? Capitol Commentary, October, 1999.
1999. Taking Aim at Gun Control. Capitol Commentary, August, 1999.
1997. A Critique of Historicism. Critica, vol. XXI/ No. 85, pp. 41&ndash63, Mexico, Abril 1997.
1997. Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Capitol Commentary, August 1997.
1996. On the General Relation of Religion, Metaphysics, and Science. In Facets of Faith and Science, Ed. J. Van der Meer. (Lanham: University Press of America, 1996), vol.2, 57-80. [pdf]
1996. A Sketch of Dooyeweerd's Philosophy of Science. In Facets of Faith and Science, Ed. J. Van der Meer. (Lanham: University Press of America, 1996), vol. 2, 81-98. [pdf]
1995. The Uniqueness of Dooyeweerd's Program for Philosophy and Science: Whence the Difference? In Christian Philosophy at the Close of the 20th Century, Ed. Griffoen & Balk (Netherlands: Kampen, Kok, 1995), 113-125. [pdf]
1993. Interest Groups Dominate Congress. Public Justice Report, Sept 1993.
1992. Faith Tectonics. Elipses, (Princeton), spring, 1992.
1989. "Is There an American National Character". The Public Justice Report, vol. 12, No. 7, April 1989.
1991. Genesis and Science on the Origin of the Human Race. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, Vol. 43, no.1, March 1991, pp. 2-13. [off site link]
1991. Victory in the Gulf?. Editorial in the Public Justice Report, vol. 14, no. 10, Washington, DC, Sept.
1989. Review of Body, Soul, and Life Everlasting by John Cooper (Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, 1989) in The Westminster Theological Journal, vol. 53, no. 1, spring 1991.
1989. Review of The Political Meaning of Christianity by Glenn Tinder (Louisiana State University Press, 1989) in the Public Justice Report, vol. 12, no. 7, March.
1988. Divine Accommodation: An Alternative Theory of Religious Language. Tijdskrif vir Christelike Wetenscap (Bloemfontein: Vereniging vir Christelike Hoer Onderwys, August, 1988), 94 -127. [pdf]
1985. Dooyeweerd on religion and faith: a response. ICS Conference paper.
A response to James Olthuis's chapter in C T McIntire (ed.). 1985b. The Legacy of Herman Dooyeweerd: Reflections on Critical Philosophy in the Christian Tradition. University Press of America: Toronto.
1984. Review of The Challenge of Marxist and NeoMarxist Ideology for Christian Scholarship. Ed. John Vander Stelt, in The Westminster Theological Journal, vol. LXVI, pp. 161 – 163, spring 1984.
1983. Religious Language: A New Look at an Old Problem. In Rationality in the Calvinian Tradition, Ed. Hart, Van derHoeven, & Wolterstorff. (Lanham: University Press of America, 1983), pp. 385ff.
1981. Four Options in the Philosophy of Religion. Anakainosis (Toronto) April.
1980. A Critique of Descartes and Heisenberg. Philosophia Reformata. (Amsterdam: Fall, 1980), 157. [pdf]
1979. Puritanism on Authority. Anakainosis, (Toronto), June 1979.
1968. Aristotle's Theory of Incontinence. Philosophia Reformata, (Amsterdam: Spring, 1968), 90-99. [pdf]
Books
The Myth of Religious Neutrality: An Essay on the Hidden Role of Religious Beliefs (University of Notre Dame Press: Notre Dame, 1991; 2nd edn 2005)
The
central claim of the book is that all theories of science and
philosophy presuppose something as divine and are in that sense
religiously regulated. The divinity belief presupposed internally
regulates theories in that the interpretation of the nature of their
postulated entities varies relative to the nature of the divinity
presupposed. This sort of internal regulation is not just
socio-cultural influence, but arises from the very activity of theory
formation and so is universal and unavoidable. The influence of
religious belief is thus deeper and more pervasive than the prevailing
view that theories need only be externally harmonized with particular
religious tenets.
To make clear exactly how such
theory-regulation works, there are case studies of the most influential
theories in mathematics, physics, and psychology. Principles are then
developed to show how this same sort of regulation can be brought to
theories when the controlling presupposition is belief in God.
This idea of a uniquely
Christian-theistic philosophy and science is derived from the work of
the Dutch Calvinist philosopher Herman Dooyeweerd (1894-1977). On his
view the most important way belief in God regulates theories is by
requiring them to presuppose a radically nonreductionist ontology, and
he constructed just such a theory. The book closes with an introduction
to that ontology and to some of its consequences for the social
sciences including political theory.
The book was nominated for the
American Academy of Religion's Excellence Award and for the Grawemeyer
Award in Religion. A second (revised) English edition appeared in the
spring of 2005, and Spanish and German translations of it will
follow.
The subject is the epistemic status of belief in God, and I side with the non-evidentialists by holding that belief in God is both produced and justified by religious experience.
The traditional classifications of religious experience are examined, critiqued, and their common core identified. The question is then raised as to whether any of them can justify, as well as generate, belief in God. This is tackled by first setting the question in a wider epistemological context and asking whether there are experiences of any kind that can justify the beliefs they produce. The prevailing answer in philosophy has been �yes�: normal sense perception and the experience of self-evidency have long been accepted as justificatory. I focus on self-evidency.
A descriptive analysis of the experience of self-evidency shows that the traditional restrictions on it are incoherent, and that once these are eliminated self-evidency is indistinguishable from what was identified as the common element in all the types of genuine religious experience. I conclude that genuine religious experience is therefore a species of (the experience of) self-evidency, and carries the same epistemic warrant.
This claim is then tested against a number of traditional objections to belief in God, and justification by self-evidency is defended as unavoidable (contrary to pragmatism), reliable though not infallible (contrary to rationalism). A number of important consequences are then drawn for apologetics and comparative religion.
