This study argues for a model in which moral truth is presented as truth in the perspective of certain social commitments, while religious truth is interpreted as truth in the perspective of religious experience. It theorizes that relativity need not conflict with universality. Truth from the perspective of the outsider is, therefore, truth without qualification.
This book is a fundamental contribution to well-known debates about intuitionism in ethics in light of older traditions. Debates about moral intuitionism do not take into account the theoretical resources of moderate voluntarism. The author submits that these debates should focus attention on ‘intellectualism versus voluntarism’ instead of ‘intuitionism versus utilitarianism’. Whereas according to moral intellectualism moral duty is seen by intuition or detected otherwise, according to moderate voluntarism moral duty is created or generated by moral commitment, ‘commitment’ being used in a broad, technical sense. The author argues for moderate voluntarism. According to moderate voluntarism moral duty can be explained by bringing out moral commitments which are correctly articulated by principles of moral duty at issue. A question about moral duty is, whether pertinent moral commitments are reasonable and acceptable. Absolute moral duty too is generated or constructed rather than detected. Moderate voluntarism does not deny that moral duties independent of commitment exist. The title of the first edition was: Exploring an Explanation of Moral Duty: Moderate Voluntarism. This second edition is enlarged by a new essay on moderate religious constructivism, which is similar to moderate voluntarism. Moderate constructivism does not explain religion using traditional ways of access such as revelation of a divine message. People may create a higher world by extrapolation from things around us to a higher, religious world. Moderate constructivism holds that certain statements about that higher world are relatively true, that is, true dependent on religious extrapolation.
The bibliography lists about 10.000 titles of monographs, collections and articles in the field of the philosophy of religion and philosophical theology that appeared between 1955 and 2005. The majority of them are in the English language but publications in German, Dutch and French are listed as well. Though it is not claimed to be exhaustive, the bibliography offers a fairly representative survey of scholarly work on the main topics of interest. *** Publications have been systematically classified according to eleven main categories: "Introductions, Surveys and Historical Issues" (Part I), "Religious Language" (Part II), "Religious Experience" (Part III), "Religious Epistemology" (Part IV), "Theism" (Part V), "Hermeneutics" (Part VI), "Religion and Science" (Part VII), "Religion and Aesthetics" (Part VIII), "Religion and Morality" (Part IX), "Religious Pluralism" (Part X) and "Feminist Philosophy of Religion" (Part XI). Part III has been subdivided into "Religious Experience" and "Mystical Experience," Part VII into "The Concept of God," (arguments for) "The Existence of God," "The Problem of Evil" and "Atheism," and Part VII into "General and Historical Issues," "Theological Issues" and "(implications of) Modern Physics, Cosmology and Biology," *** The bibliography will particularly be useful to scholars, teachers and students in the philosophy of religion, philosophical theology and systematic theology as well as to those who are interested, professionally or otherwise, in the results of academic scholarship in those fields.
Empirical Logic and Public Debate supplies a large number of previously unpublished papers that together make up a survey of recent developments in the field of empirical logic. It contains theoretical contributions, some of a more formal and some of an informal nature, as well as numerous contemporary and historical case studies. The book will therefore be attractive both to those who wish to focus upon the theory and practice of discussion, debate, arguing, and argument, as well as to those readers who are primarily interested in applications to a particular field, such as ethics, political philosophy, feminist philosophy, or the history of philosophy.
This innovative book is written in an accessible, compact style that sets forth and explains a sound framework for professional ethics that readers can quickly put into practice in analyzing and writing about cases. Through a series of moral conflicts, it aims at improving the skills of moral reasoning and achieving moral development.
Art Lindsley ably demonstrates that faith in Christ is necessarily opposed to and incompatible with the abuses of oppression, arrogance, intolerance, self-righteousness, closed-mindedness and defensiveness. Surprisingly, he shows that it is relativism which often harbors dangerous, inflexible absolutisms.
Moral relativism is deeply troubling for those who believe that, without a set of moral absolutes, democratic societies will devolve into tyranny or totalitarianism. Engaging directly with this claim, Carlo Invernizzi Accetti traces the roots of contemporary anti-relativist fears to the antimodern rhetoric of the Catholic Church and then rescues a form of philosophical relativism for modern, pluralist societies, arguing that this viewpoint provides the firmest foundation for an allegiance to democracy. In his analyses of the relationship between religious arguments and political authority and the implications of philosophical relativism for democratic theory, Accetti makes a far-ranging contribution to contemporary debates over the revival of religion in politics and the conceptual grounds for a commitment to democracy. He presents the first comprehensive genealogy of anti-relativist discourse and reclaims for English-speaking readers the overlooked work of Hans Kelsen on the connection between relativism and democracy. By engaging with contemporary attempts to replace the religious foundation of democratic values with a neo-Kantian conception of reason, Accetti also makes a powerful case for relativism as the best basis for a civic ethos that integrates different perspectives into democratic politics.
