SCIENTIFIC AND RELIGIOUS APPROACHES TO MORALITY: AN ALTERNATIVE TO MUTUAL ANATHEMAS.
Many people today believe that scientific and religious approaches to morality are mutually incompatible. Militant secularists claim scientific backing for their claim that the evolution of morality discredits religious conceptions of ethics. Some of their opponents respond with unhelpful apologetic...
| Publicado en: | Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science Vol. 48; no. 1; pp. 20 - 35 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Open Library of Humanities
Mar2013
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=85784775&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 85784775 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 05912385 ZYG jtl: Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science issn: 05912385 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Mar2013 vid: 48 iid: 1 pid: 15576 pub: Open Library of Humanities artinfo: ui: 85784775 10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01323.x ppf: 20 ppct: 15 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 800KB tig: atl: SCIENTIFIC AND RELIGIOUS APPROACHES TO MORALITY: AN ALTERNATIVE TO MUTUAL ANATHEMAS. aug: au: Pope, Stephen J. affil: Stephen J. Pope is a Professor in the Theology Department at Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467, USA su: Religion & ethics Science & ethics Atheists Religion & science Tradition (Theology) sug: subj: Religion & ethics Science & ethics Atheists Religion & science Tradition (Theology) keyword: Biblical literalism church evolution faith historical consciousness morality religion secularism ab: Many people today believe that scientific and religious approaches to morality are mutually incompatible. Militant secularists claim scientific backing for their claim that the evolution of morality discredits religious conceptions of ethics. Some of their opponents respond with unhelpful apologetics based on fundamentalist views of revelation. This article attempts to provide an alternative option. It argues that public discussion has been excessively influenced by polemics generated by the new atheists. Religious writers have too often resorted to overly simplistic arguments rooted in literalist approaches to the Bible and the religious traditions. More historically conscious methods can avoid implausible claims about both religion and science. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science is the property of Open Library of Humanities and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science holder: Open Library of Humanities dt: @attributes: year: 2013 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|