Reply to the respondents to "Justified religious difference: a constructive approach to religious diversity"
In this reply, I take up the challenges the five respondents raised. In particular, I deal with the issues of truth, bivalence (respectively tertium non datur), tolerance, and justification.
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic/Print Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
Taylor & Francis
[2016]
|
In: |
International journal of philosophy and theology
Year: 2015, Volume: 76, Issue: 5, Pages: 458-486 |
Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Truth
/ Faith
/ Bi-valence
/ Religious tolerance
/ Justification (Philosophy)
|
RelBib Classification: | AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism AX Inter-religious relations |
Online Access: |
Volltext (doi) |
Summary: | In this reply, I take up the challenges the five respondents raised. In particular, I deal with the issues of truth, bivalence (respectively tertium non datur), tolerance, and justification. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2169-2327 |
Reference: | Kritik von "A theological alternative to Grube’s notion of "Justified religious difference" (2016)"
Kritik von "What about unjustified religious difference? (2016)" Kritik von "Response to Dirk-Martin Grube (2016)" Kritik von "Grube on justified religious difference (2016)" Kritik von "An epistemic argument for tolerance (2016)" |
Contains: | Enthalten in: International journal of philosophy and theology
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2015.1184916 |