Narrow search


By category:

By publication type:

By language:

By journals:

By document type:


Displaying: 101-120 of 1137 documents

0.121 sec

101. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 15 > Issue: 4
Robert Merrihew Adams Self-Love and the Vices of Self-Preference
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The paper explores the extent to which self-love, as understood by Bishop Butler, may be in harmony with altruistic virtue. Whereas Butler was primarily concerned to rebut suspicions directed against altruism, the suspicions principally addressed by the present writer are directed against self-love. It is argued that the main vices of self-preference---particularly selfishness, self-centeredness, and arrogance---are not essentially excesses of self-love and, indeed, do not necessarily involve self-love. lt is argued further that self-love is something one is typically taught as a child, for socially compelling reasons. This suggests how a healthy self-love and a healthy commitment to the common good can be integrated and will normally be in harmony.
102. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 15 > Issue: 4
Phillip L. Quinn The Virtue of Obedience
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This paper is a critical study of Christians among the Virtues: Theological Conversations with Ancient and Modern Ethics by Stanley Hauerwas and Charles Pinches. It has four parts. First, I consider several possible responses to G. E. M. Anscombe’s famous challenge to modern moral philosophy in order to provide a framework in which the project of Hauerwas and Pinches can be located. Next I criticize their attempt to eliminate the realm of obligation from morality. Then I examine their treatment of Martha Nussbaum’s work onAristotle in order to explore differences between secular and Christian appropriations of Aristotle. Finally, I discuss their views on the virtue of obedience and criticize their arguments against rival Kantian and divine command views.
103. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 15 > Issue: 4
Linda Zagzebski The Virtues of God and the Foundations of Ethics
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
In this paper I give a theological foundation to a radical type of virtue ethics I call motivation-based. In motivation-based virtue theory all moral concepts are derivative from the concept of a good motive, the most basic component of a virtue, where what I mean by a motive is an emotion that initiates and directs action towards an end. Here I give a foundation to motivation-based virtue theory by making the motivations of one person in particular the ultimate foundation of all moral value, and that person is God. The theory is structurally parallel to Divine Command Theory, but has a number of advantages over DC theory without the well-known problems. In particular, DM theory does not face a dilemma parallel to the famous Euthyphro problem, nor does it have any difficulty answering the question whether God could make cruelty morally right. Unlike DC theory, it explains the importance of Christology in Christian ethics, and it has the advantage of providing a unitary account of all evaluative properties, divine and human. I call the theory Divine Motivation Theory.
104. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 15 > Issue: 4
Kenneth W. Kemp The Virtue of Faith in Theology, Natural Science, and Philosophy
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
In this paper, I attempt to develop the account of intellectual virtues offered by Aristotle and St. Thomas in a way which recognizes faith as a good intellectual habit. I go on to argue that, as a practical matter, this virtue is needed not only in theology, where it provides the basis of further intellectual work, but also in the natural sciences, where it is required given the complexity of the subject matter and the cooperative nature of the enterprise.
105. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 15 > Issue: 4
David A. Horner What It Takes to be Great: Aristotle and Aquinas on Magnaminity
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The revival of virtue ethics is largely inspired by Aristotle, but few---especially Christians---follow him in seeing virtue supremely exemplified in the “magnanimous” man. However, Aristotle raises a matter of importance: the character traits and type of psychological stance exemplified in those who aspire to acts of extraordinary excellence. I explore the accounts of magnanimity found in both Aristotle and Aquinas, defending the intelligibility and acceptability of some central elements of a broadly Aristotelian conception of magnanimity. Aquinas, I argue, provides insight into how Christian ethics may appropriate central elements of a broadly Aristotelian conception of extraordinary virtue.
106. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 15 > Issue: 4
Robert C. Roberts Character Ethics and Moral Wisdom
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
A particular conception of the enterprise of character ethics is proposed, in which the central preoccupation of the discipline is to explore the logical-psychological features of particular virtues. An attraction of this approach is the prospect it holds out of promoting in its practitioners and readers the virtue of moral wisdom. Such analysis is sensitive to differences among moral traditions which imply differences in the logical-psychological features of versions of types of virtues. Thus Christian generosity could be expected to have some features which differentiate it from Aristotelian or Stoic generosity. On the proposed view, the aim is not to produce a theory of the virtues which, it is argued, is likely to be reductivist and thus systematically distorting. Instead, the aim is produce “grammatical” analyses of them. To this end a series of open-ended questions are provided, to guide the exploration. The method is illustrated by aschematic analysis of the virtue of gratitude. The paper ends with remarks about the power and limits of such analysis to produce moral wisdom.
107. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
David P. Hunt On Augustine’s Way Out
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This paper seeks to rehabilitate St. Augustine’s widely dismissed response to the alleged incompatibility of divine foreknowledge and free will. This requires taking a fresh look at his analysis in On Free Choice of the Will, and arguing its relevance to the current debate. Along the way, mistaken interpretations of Augustine are rebutted, his real solution is developed and defended, a reason for his not anticipating Boethius’s a temporalist solution is suggested, a favorable comparison with Ockham is made, rival solutions are rejected, and the aporetic nature of the problem is explained.
108. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Stewart Goetz Stumping For Widerker
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
David Widerker has forcefully argued that a libertarian is on firm ground in believing that the principle of alternative possibilities (PAP) is true. Eleonore Stump has argued that not all libertarians need accept PAP, and that its acceptance is not required for a rejection of compatibilism.This paper is a defense of Widerker against Stump. I argue that it is not at all clear that Stump’s view of freedom is libertarian in nature, and that she has not provided a good reason for thinking that a libertarian can abandon PAP.
109. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Bruce R. Reichenbach Inclusivism and the Atonement
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Richard Swinburne claims that Christ’s death has no efficacy unless people appropriate it. According to religious inclusivists, God can be encountered and his grace manifested in various ways through diverse religions. Salvation is available for everyone, regardless of whether they have heard about Christ’s sacrifice. This poses the question whether Swinburne’s view of atonement is available to the inclusivist. I develop an inclusivist interpretation of the atonement that incorporates his four features of atonement, along with a subjective dimension that need not include specific knowledge of Christ’s sacrifice.
110. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
William L. Rowe The Problem of Divine Sovereignty and Human Freedom
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
According to the Westminster Confession, “God from all eternity did ... freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass. Yet ... thereby neither is God the author of sin or is violence offered to the will of the creatures.” It is hard to see how these two points can be consistently maintained. Hugh McCann, however, argues that by placing God’s decisions outside of time, both propositions are perfectly consistent. I agree with McCann that God’s determining decisions do not make him the author of our sins. But I think that God’s determining decisions, whether temporal or outside of time, preclude our possessing the libertarian free will that McCann’s believes we do possess. In fact, so I argue, if we possess libertarian free will, then elevating God’s determining decisions outside of time only results in God’s eternal decisions being within our power to determine.
111. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Michael J. Murray Three Versions of Universalism
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
In recent years a number of sophisticated versions of soteriological universalism have appeared in the literature. In this essay I offer some critical retlections them. In particular, I argue that universalism offers no explanation for the fact that God puts human creatures through the earthly life, and that if there is no such reason then the earthly life and the evil it contains are both gratuitous. Finally, I argue that universalists are obliged to deny that human beings have a centrally important feature of human freedom.
112. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Kent Reames A Response to Swinburne’s Latest Defense of the Argument For Dualism
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This paper responds to Swinburne’s recent article “Dualism Intact,” which defends his argument for a body/soul dualism. It pays particular attention to his defense against the charges of Alston and Smythe, especially the appeal to the “quasi-Aristotelian assumption,” on which the essence of a thing is necessary to its being the thing that it is. I argue that this defense does not save the argument, but only makes clear that its apparent plausibility rests on an ambiguity between two understandings of the nature of logical possibility. Swinburne’s argument draws on and requires both understandings at different points in his argument, but the two are incompatible at the key point.
113. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Thomas Talbott Universalism and the Greater Good: Reply to Gordon Knight
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Gordon Knight recently challenged my assumption, which I made for the purpose of organizing and classifying certain theological disputes, that a specific set of three propositions is logically inconsistent (or necessarily false). In this brief rejoinder, I explain Knight’s objection and show why it rests upon a misunderstanding.
114. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
Mark Wynn Natural Theology In an Ecological Mode
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The paper considers the possibility of an alliance between natural theologians and environmental ethicists in so far as both uphold the goodness of the natural world. Specifically, it examines whether the work of Holmes Rolston III can contribute towards the natural theologian’s treatment of two issues: the nature and extent of the world’s goodness, and the reasons why we may fail to register its goodness fully. The paper argues that the holism and non-anthropocentrism of Rolston’s work throw new light on the values in nature, and on the multiple achievements which are presupposed in any informed appreciation of its goodness.
115. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 1
James F. Sennett Is There Freedom In Heaven?
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This paper examines the dilemma of heavenly freedom. If there is freedom in heaven, then it seems that there is the possibility of evil in heaven, which violates standard intuitions. If there is not, then heaven is lacking a good significant enough that it would justify God in creating free beings, despite the evil they might cause. But then how can God be justified in omitting such a good from heaven? To resolve this dilemma, I present the Proximate Conception of freedom, which holds that actions may be free though determined, but only if they have in their causal history some undetermined free actions by the same agent. I show how this conception resolves the dilemma, defend it against objections, and comment on its implications.
116. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 3
Shane R. Cudney “Religion Without Religion”: Caputo, Derrida, and the Violence of Particularity
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Jack Caputo’s most recent book follows Derrida in proposing a “religion without religion”, a posture that, while committed to the general structure of religion, attempts to philosophically distance itself from specific, historical exemplifications of that structure. I propose that by determining what motivates the distinction between what is termed the “messianic” and “messianisms”, a space opens that allows us to call into question this “desert religion.” I will conclude by suggesting an alternative posture, one that attempts to honor both the universal structure of religion, and the particular, historical content of religion.
117. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 3
H. E. Baber Abba, Father: Inclusive Language and Theological Salience
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Questions about the use of “inclusive language” in Christian discourse are trivial but the discussion which surrounds them raises an exceedingly important question, namely that of whether gender is theologically salient-whether Christian doctrine either reveals theologically significant differences between men and women or prescribes different roles for them. Arguably both conservative support for sex roles and allegedly progressive doctrines about the theological significance of gender, race, ethnicity and sexual orientation are contrary to the radical teaching of the Gospel that in Christ there is no male or female, Greek or Jew, slave or free man.
118. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 3
Caleb Miller Creation, Redemption and Virtue
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
In this paper, I defend the claim that Christian theology gives us good reason to think that virtue is relative to individuals and communities, i.e., that what character traits are virtues for individuals is relative to individuals and to the communities of which they are members. I begin by reviewing the theological claims that I take to be relevant. I then argue that these claims make it plausible to conclude that virtue is morally redemptive and therefore relative to individuals and communities. I then seek to use these conclusions to illuminate the discussion of the correctiveness of virtue. Finally I respond to some objections and suggest some further ways that my views could be developed.
119. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 3
Helen E. Cullen Simone Weil on Greece’s Desire for the Ultimate Bridge to God: The Passion
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Simone Weil believed that Greece’s vocation was to build bridges between God and man. This paper argues that, in light of Weil’s “tradition of mystical thought,” the Christian vocation is an extension of the Greek. The search for the perfect bridge in Homer, Sophocles and Plato comes to fruition in the Passion of Christ. The Greek thinkers, especially Plato with his Perfectly Just Man, already had implicit knowledge of the Passion’s truth.
120. Faith and Philosophy: Volume > 16 > Issue: 3
Graham Oppy Koons’ Cosmological Argument
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Robert Koons has recently defended what he claims is a successful argument for the existence of a necessary first cause, and which he develops by taking “a new look” at traditional arguments from contingency. I argue that Koons’ argument is less than successful; in particular, I claim that his attempt to “shift the burden of proof” to non-theists amounts to nothing more than an ill-disguised begging of one of the central questions upon which theists and non-theists disagree. I also argue that his interesting attempt to bridge (part of) the familiar gap between the claim that there is a necessary first cause and the claim that God exists is beset with numerous difficulties.