Reply to Criticisms

Abstract. Comments on my essay, “A Tale of Two Controversies,” were made by Daniel R. DeNicola, Thomas F. Green, Mary Hesse, Holmes Rolston 111, and Abner Shimony. This reply focuses first on three issues: that very recently moral philosophy has taken a turn toward a more traditional, particularisti...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Eger, Martin (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Open Library of Humanities$s2024- 1988
In: Zygon
Year: 1988, Volume: 23, Issue: 3, Pages: 363-368
Further subjects:B philosophy of science
B evolution / creation
B Morals
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Parallel Edition:Non-electronic
Description
Summary:Abstract. Comments on my essay, “A Tale of Two Controversies,” were made by Daniel R. DeNicola, Thomas F. Green, Mary Hesse, Holmes Rolston 111, and Abner Shimony. This reply focuses first on three issues: that very recently moral philosophy has taken a turn toward a more traditional, particularistic approach, which could mitigate the problems I described; second, that because creationism is essentially antiscientific, my more philosophical concerns miss the mark; third, that the relativism of the “new philosophy of science” ought not be uncritically accepted. Finally, I compare Hesse's position with that of Shimony, indicating how the former implies a narrowing of distance between scientific description and moral prescription.
ISSN:1467-9744
Contains:Enthalten in: Zygon
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9744.1988.tb00641.x