The three courses were shameful attempts to reconcile science with religion using as an example religious pseudosciences. In all courses, the theme "Intelligent Design" was approached, but in this specific there was a desperate attempt to link Buddhism to Quantum Entanglement, which are two completely opposite things. In general, the course aims to indoctrinate based on pseudoscience rather than teaching science, philosophy and religion in a critical and systematic way. Perhaps this is the main reason why the course is sponsored by the obscure and pseudoscientific John Templeton Foundation.

Well, I was expecting that the course creators would pull a rabbit out of a magician's hat in this last part of the course in order to show that science and Christianity are compatible but unfortunately it seems to have gone out 'not with a bang but a Wimpey' as John Cooper Clarke used to say, drifting off in to the sunset with an advertisement for an animal rights website. So, no miracles here, then.

The course in itself was excellent. One thing I liked about all the courses until this one (Philosophy, Philosophy of Science 1 & 2; and Philosophy, Science, and Religion 1 & 2) was that it was optional to do peer-reviewed assignments and discussion questions,etc.--I despise doing those. In this course it was required. Also whenever in any of these courses the instructors demonstrated to me that they did not understand young earth creationism and to deny that these fine Christian gentlemen and scholars are doing real science is unfair. I have read and studied their material and they are top notch scientists--it is just that their conclusions are different.

I find this course very interesting and well structured. I reckon that these three courses about Philosophy, Science and Religion conform a very complete approach to the topic. I would recommend these three courses to anyone interested in our role as human-beings in the existence. I feel very grateful to the instructors of the courses and Coursera's platform.

Interesting combination of science, religion and the philosophy of it all. And how science and philosophy does truly go hand in hand. Highly recommended if you are a curious cat such as myself! Deadlines are flexible for us working professionals.

Excellent course bringing a whole lot of crystal clear and sober arguments in an often over-heated debate between religion and science #MUSTFOLLOW

Excellent course to ponder and analyze.

I really enjoyed it.

Enlightening!

wonderful

I found the material on intelligent design and creationism intriguing, as it's a great foil to play off against the rational assumptions upon which this course and its professors and students must favor, by definition. While some may bristle at its inclusion, it enlivened the overall impact. On the other hand, although I've studied Buddhism before and was familiar with a lot of Prof Priest's week 3 material, I though too much emphasis was given it compared to what other Buddhist thinkers might have added. However, the overall course I found valuable, and I liked in some parts the diminished amount of quizzes, as in the Buddhist section, to instead look at personal reflections and insights we all could add to the mix.

I thoroughly enjoyed the three part course on "Philosophy, Science and Religion" by the University of Edinburgh. A BIG THANK YOU to those who put these courses together. In this series, the designers wonderfully weaved the relationship between the three apparently diverse disciplines in a cohesive narrative, making ones understanding richer!

This was a very difficult course for me due to the nature of the subject. However, Dr. Priest did an excellent job explaining the concepts so that I could follow along. Well done.

The course is great. I feel intellectually enriched. Invest in translations and it will be perfect.

A good course that offers some helpful insights that are not immediately obvious to lay people.

Nicely comprehensive and cohesive.

The topics were certainly interesting and generally well presented, but of the three linked courses, this is noticeably the weakest and most uneven from a pedagogic point of view. With a third of the material (both in terms of teaching and student participation) being concentrated in one week (week 3), one felt either this section was too long, or that one was being short changed with regard to the other topics.

I also found many discussion topics annoyingly vague, spending more time trying to work out what was one was supposed to talk about than actually talking about it, while most of the quizzes were so ludicrously simple they were a waste of time.

This was the weakest of the three courses in the series. It was unbalanced in the amount of material in the different weeks and one or two of the weeks were very light weight compared with the standard in the other two courses. Could do with a critical review.