Response to John Hare

Studies in Christian Ethics 25 (2):255-260 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

John Hare’s paper successfully exposes philosophical naïvéties and reductive pretensions in the evolutionary research he surveys. But he fails to clarify how ‘God’, on a view such as Dominic Johnson’s, could not be seen merely as a dispensable projection of ‘primitive’ societies, and thus how his own continuing commitment to a Kantian ethic might need to be bolstered by a concomitant form of ‘natural theology’ attentive to evolutionary dynamics

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

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

Philosophical remarks on Peter Hare.John J. McDermott - 2010 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 46 (1):73-77.
Peter Hare on the philosophy of curt John Ducasse.John R. Shook - 2010 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 46 (1):47-52.
Hare's defense of utilitarianism.Thomas L. Carson - 1986 - Philosophical Studies 50 (1):97 - 115.
Is medical ethics lost? Response from Professor Hare.R. M. Hare - 1993 - Journal of Medical Ethics 19 (4):238-239.
Grieving a consummate professional.John Lachs - 2010 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 46 (1):78-81.
Hare on utilitarianism and intuitive morality.Tom Carson - 1993 - Erkenntnis 39 (3):305 - 331.
Peter Hare on the proposition.John Corcoran - 2010 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 46 (1):21-34.
A Metaethical Option for Theists.Kyle Swan - 2006 - Journal of Religious Ethics 34 (1):3-20.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-05-31

Downloads
27 (#576,320)

6 months
3 (#1,002,413)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references