Evolutionary Naturalism, by Michael Ruse [Book Review]

Heythrop Journal 38 (4):473-475 (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Many agree that philosophers of knowledge and of moral behavior should take into thoughtful consideration the findings of contemporary evolutionary biology but how to do this is not always clear. Ruse makes useful suggestions on how such scientific results should be incorporated.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A defense of Darwinian accounts of morality.John Lemos - 2001 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 31 (3):361-385.
Biology intersects religion and morality.Kevin J. Sharpe - 1992 - Biology and Philosophy 7 (1):77-88.
Is sociobiology a new paradigm?Michael Ruse - 1987 - Philosophy of Science 54 (1):98-104.
Darwin and the philosophers.Michael Ruse - 2000 - In Richard Creath & Jane Maienschein (eds.), Biology and Epistemology. Cambridge University Press. pp. 3.
Ruse's Darwinian meta-ethics: A critique. [REVIEW]Peter Woolcock - 1993 - Biology and Philosophy 8 (4):423-439.
Michael Ruse's Design for Living.Robert J. Richards - 2004 - Journal of the History of Biology 37 (1):25 - 38.
Science Evolving. [REVIEW]Ray Scott Percival - 1995 - Nature 376 (6536):131-132.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-02-03

Downloads
101 (#164,688)

6 months
56 (#72,624)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Louis Caruana
Pontificia Universita Gregoriana

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references