Motives still don't matter: Reply to Pynes

Zygon 47 (4):662-665 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper continues a dialogue that began with an article by Jeffrey Koperski entitled “Two Bad Ways to Attack Intelligent Design and Two Good Ones,” published in the June 2008 issue of Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science. In a response article, Christopher Pynes argues that ad hominem arguments are sometimes legitimate, especially when critiquing Intelligent Design . We show that Pynes's examples only apply to matters of testimony, not the kinds of arguments found in the best defenses of ID

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,069

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Seven Arguments Against Extra Credit.Christopher Pynes - 2014 - Teaching Philosophy 37 (2):191-214.
Intelligent Design and the End of Science.Jeffrey Koperski - 2003 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (4):567-588.
Why is there a stem cell debate? And how to depoliticize it.Christopher A. Pynes - 2007 - In Mohan Matthen & Christopher Stephens (eds.), Philosophy of Biology. Elsevier. pp. 144--425.
Plato's Republic: A Tale of Two Cities.Donald C. Hodges & Christopher A. Pynes - 2002 - Telos: Critical Theory of the Contemporary 2002 (123):175-182.
Validity, Schema, and a Modus Tollens Paradox.Christopher Pynes - 2002 - Southwest Philosophy Review 18 (1):53-63.
The Design Revolution. [REVIEW]Jeffrey Koperski - 2004 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):674-679.
Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design.Bradley Monton - 2011 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 3 (1):254 - 259.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-05

Downloads
14 (#862,846)

6 months
2 (#725,330)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations