by Holmes Rolston III

Abstract

Both science and ethics are embedded in cultural traditions where truths are shared through education; both need competent critics educated within such traditions. Education in both ought to be directed although moral education demands levels of responsible agency that science education does not. Evolutionary science often carries an implicit or explicit understanding of who and what humans are, one which may not be coherent with the implicit or explicit human self-understanding in moral education

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,752

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

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Rolston's Theory of Value.Katie McShane - 2007 - In Christopher J. Preston and Wayne Ouderkirk (ed.), Nature, Value, Duty: Life on Earth with Holmes Rolston, III. Springer.
Environment and the Moral Life. [REVIEW] Rolston - 1999 - Environmental Ethics 21 (4):441-443.
Schlick's responsible man.Iii Holmes Rolston - 1975 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 36 (2):261-267.
Can Nature be Evil?Wayne Ouderkirk - 1999 - Environmental Ethics 21 (2):135-150.
Rolston’s Theological Ethic.Francisco Benzoni - 1996 - Environmental Ethics 18 (4):339-352.
The fallacy of wildlife conservation.Iii Holmes Rolston - 1985 - Environmental Ethics 7 (2):177-180.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-05-04

Downloads
41 (#386,790)

6 months
1 (#1,464,097)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references