My most popular courses I now offer yearly, and this is one of them. Back by popular demand, I am teaching my online course on naturalism as a philosophy and worldview this March (just a few weeks away): Naturalism as a Worldview: How to Build a Sound Philosophy of Life.

Learn about all aspects of naturalism as a philosophy of life, and how to use it in practical ways, and improve on it, to develop a better personal philosophy of life, the world, and everything. In the process you will learn many of the basics of college-level philosophy, and how to think like a philosopher, an important skill for those who know religion is bunk, but that we still need a better way of understanding ourselves and the world.

The course is one month online. You study and participate at your own pace, as much or as little as you like, and you get to ask me any questions you want about the course topics all month long, and read and participate in online discussions with me and other students. I will direct and comment on readings each week and give weekly course assignments which consist of answering questions about what you’ve learned and what you think about it. The course text you have to buy is Sense and Goodness without God. All other readings and media will be provided to students free of charge (all you have to provide is your access to the internet).

Course Description: Build the foundations for a practical philosophy. Learn how to develop and defend your own naturalistic worldview from studying and critiquing a model example, and how to employ it in your daily lives and your understanding of the world. Learn the basics of how to develop and test a philosophy of epistemology (theory of knowledge), metaphysics (theory of existence), ethics (theory of morality), aesthetics (theory of beauty), and politics (theory of government), using logical, evidence-based reasoning. Based on assigned readings, lectures, and weekly class discussion online with Dr. Carrier (Ph.D. in the history of philosophy from Columbia University).

Specific Topics Addressed Include: (1) “Naturalism, Supernaturalism, Philosophy, and Worldview Theory,” in which we learn what naturalism is, and how it differs from supernaturalism; what a worldview is, and the basics of how to think about and construct a worldview; and what philosophy is, and how to think like a philosopher. (2) “Naturalism and the Universe, Your Self, Your Mind, and Your Freedom,” in which we learn what naturalism can say about the nature and origins of existence, of the universe and all its contents, but also in particular of you as a person, and thus of consciousness, thought, and freedom (your personal autonomy). (3) “Naturalism on Morality, Society, and Politics,” in which we learn what naturalism can say about whether there is any moral or political truth, what it’s nature is, and where it comes from, and what this means for how we should strive to organize society. (4) And “Naturalism on Meaning, Purpose, and Beauty in Life,” in which we learn what naturalism can say about the meaning of life and its purpose or value, and about the nature of beauty and ugliness, and what value they have, what they signify, and where they come from.

Tuition: $59

Must register by March 5 . And the course could fill quickly so register sooner rather than later. It may be a year before I offer it again.

More details here.

2 Comments

skeptic myself on February 26, 2015 at 6:47 am

Just wanna ask if you can “create” or “make” a human being. Science keeps on claiming it knows a great deal about what makes up the gene, the DNA, cells, etc. So, why can’t any serious scientist make or create a living person by combining all the elements that make a cell or gene or DNA or whatever term available. Has any scientist made a DNA or a gene, by the way?
Gary Slabaugh on March 4, 2015 at 2:32 pm

What would be a “deeper relatedness” in your honest and well thought out opinion between emergent consciousness and philosophical naturalism?

This is the way the foundation of the mind works: it chooses one perspective and tends to negate others.… Intellect’s capacity for making judgments is a great gift, but when ego co-opts intellect to reinforce its own value, it can be profoundly damaging to relatedness – Anne Hillman Awakening the Energies of Love p102.

Also I was just wondering the last time you admitted that someone was probably less wrong than you are about a philosophical belief?

Is this quote from Sam Harris in Waking Up p215n anti-naturalistic?

The idea that consciousness is identical to (or emerged from) a certain class of unconscious physical events seems impossible to properly conceive – which is to say that we can think that we are thinking it, but we are probably mistaken. We can say the right words: “Consciousness emerges from unconscious information processing.” We can also say “Some squares are as round as circles” and 2 + 2 equals 7.” But are we really thinking these things all the way through? I don’t think so.

Rhetorical questions