.png){kind=logo}
This is part 2 of a debate with Roman Catholic theology graduate student named Mary. In part 1, we introduced and began to debate the topic of whether or not universities, hospitals, and social agencies run by the Catholic Church should be exempted from laws requiring employers to provide their employees health insurance that covers [...]
Archive for the ‘Authority’ Category
“What Are The Limits of Church Authority In the Public Sphere?”
February 5th, 2012 
Daniel Fincke 
Posted in Abortion, Abortion, Applied Ethics, Applied Ethics, Authoritarianism, Authoritarianism, Authority, Authority, Autonomy, Autonomy, Barack Obama, Barack Obama, Bio-Medical Ethics, Bio-Medical Ethics, Christianity, Christianity, Civil Rights, Civil Rights, Contemporary Ethics, Contemporary Ethics, Feminism, Feminism, Gay Marriage, Gay Marriage, Gay Rights, Gay Rights, Homophobia, Homophobia, Law, Law, LGBTQAA, News Discussion, News Discussion, Personal, Philosophy, Political Secularism, Political Secularism, Politics, Politics, Religious Extremism, Religious Extremism, Religious Moderates, Religious Moderates, Religious Rights, Religious Rights, Religious Secularism, Religious Secularism, Right Wing Politics, Right Wing Politics, Roman Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Church, Secularism, Separation of Church and State, Separation of Church and State, Women's Rights, Women's Rights, Women's Rights, Women's Issues 
Tags: 1st Amendment, Affordable Care Act, Conscience Exemptions, Discrimination Against Gays, Free Exercise, Freedom of Religion, Gay Rights, Health Coverage For Gay Spouses, Mary C. Young, Pharmacists Rights of Conscience, Relig, Religious Discrimination, Reproductive Rights, Roman Catholic Adoption Agencies Refuse Gay Adoptions, Roman Catholic Charities, Roman Catholic Church 
55 Comments »“Should Catholic Employers Be Exempted From Paying For Health Insurance Covering Contraception?”
February 5th, 2012 Daniel Fincke If you were reading Camels With Hammers regularly before we made the move to Freethought Blogs, you would have frequently been treated to the long, insightful, and vigorously argued comments of my friend Mary. Mary is a Roman Catholic and is politically liberal in many (but not all) respects. We met when I was a [...]
Posted in Applied Ethics, Applied Ethics, Authoritarianism, Authoritarianism, Authority, Authority, Barack Obama, Barack Obama, Christianity, Christianity, Cultural Secularism, Cultural Secularism, Feminism, Feminism, News Discussion, News Discussion, Personal, Philosophy, Political Secularism, Political Secularism, Politics, Politics, Religious Moderates, Religious Moderates, Religious Secularism, Religious Secularism, Roman Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Church, Secularism, Separation of Church and State, Separation of Church and State, Women's Rights, Women's Rights, Women's Rights, Women's Rights, Women's Issues Tags: 1st Amendment, Affordable Care Act, Catholics and Obamacare, Conscience Exemptions, Discrimination, Freedom of Religion, Mary C. Young, obamacare, Obamacare and Contraception, Religious Discrimination, Reproductive Rights, Roman Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Universities 48 Comments »God and Goodness
January 30th, 2012 Daniel Fincke Robin: Look, I get it, Jaime. As an atheist, you think that God’s wisdom is foolishness, that God’s righteousness is wickedness, and that the bloody death of Jesus on the cross is hateful and ugly rather than the epitome of love and beauty that Christians like I think it is. The Bible makes it very [...]
Posted in Arguments Against The Existence of God, Arguments Against The Existence of God, Arguments for the Existence of God, Arguments for the Existence of God, Authority, Authority, Bible, Bible, Christianity, Christianity, Ethics, God, God, Metaethics, Metaethics, Metaphysics, Metaphysics, Morality, Morality, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy Of Religion, Problem of Evil, Problem of Evil, Rationalism, Religion, Religion Tags: Divine Command Theory, God and Goodness, God's goodness, Theological Voluntarism 26 Comments »If You Don’t Believe In Objective Values, Then Don’t Talk To Me About Objective Scientific Truth Either
November 27th, 2011 Daniel Fincke I recently argued that when any of us act, we must act for reasons. When acting for reasons we must decide that the end we pursue is the best, most worthwhile, goal to pursue and that the action we take in order to achieve that goal is the most suitable one. I should also add [...]
Posted in Applied Ethics, Applied Ethics, Atheistic Ethics, Atheistic Ethics, Authority, Authority, Epistemic Justification, Epistemic Justification, Epistemology, Ethical Pluralism, Ethical Pluralism, Ethics, Ethics, Evidence, Evidence, Hypocrisy, Hypocrisy, Intellectual Vices, Intellectual Virtues, Intellectual Virtues, Metaethics, Metaethics, Morality, Morality, Naturalistic Fallacy, Naturalistic Fallacy, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy, Philosophy of Science, Philosophy of Science, Science, Science, Teleology, Teleology Tags: Coherency, Coherency Theory of Truth, Epistemic Normativity, Fictionalism in Science, Goodness is Effectiveness, Incoherency of Moral Nihilism, Moral Nihilism, Moral Normativity, Morals and Values, Naturalistic Fallacy, Normativity, Norms and Moral Norms, Norms and Values, Objective Values, Objectivity in Reason, Positivistic Nietzscheanism, Presuppositionalism, Problem of Induction, Scientific Truth vs. Moral Truth, Subjective Values, Subjectivity in Reason, Values in Reason, Values in Science, Values Nihilism 109 Comments »Is The Use of Pepper Spray Torture?
November 20th, 2011 Daniel Fincke Yesterday digby discussed various cases of the use of pepper spray to argue that it is obviously torture. Is it torture? If it is torture but in some cases it could foreseeably prevent an altercation with greater likelihood of long term physical damage could it be justified nonetheless? Is it only unjustified when applied to non-violent [...]
Emma Goldman’s “The Victims of Morality”
November 14th, 2011 Daniel Fincke In reply to my dialogue which I posted this morning examining what I perceive to be immoralism’s important contributions to moral thinking and its inevitable limits, a reader sent me to investigate Max Stirner and Emma Goldman. I may have something to say about Stirner in the future if time permits. But for now I [...]
Posted in Applied Ethics, Applied Ethics, Atheism, Atheism, Atheism, Atheistic Ethics, Atheistic Ethics, Authority, Authority, Autonomy, Autonomy, Christianity, Christianity, Ethics, Ethics, Feminism, Feminism, Historical Ethics, Historical Ethics, Historical Philosophy, Historical Philosophy, Morality, Morality, New Atheism, New Atheism, New Atheism, New Atheism, Nietzsche, Nietzsche, Religion, Religion, Religious Extremism, Religious Extremism, Separation of Church and State, Separation of Church and State, Theocrats, Theocrats, Women's Rights, Women's Rights, Women's Rights, Women's Rights, Women's Issues 7 Comments »Immoralism?
November 14th, 2011 Daniel Fincke Taylor: I’ve been reading a lot of Nietzsche of late, like you recommended. Pat: Oh? And what do you think? What are you taking away from it? Taylor: I really like what he has to say about immoralism. I realized I am an immoralist. Pat: How so? How are you interpreting that word? Taylor: Well, he makes this really fascinating [...]
Posted in Atheistic Ethics, Atheistic Ethics, Authority, Authority, Autonomy, Autonomy, Contemporary Ethics, Contemporary Ethics, Ethical Pluralism, Ethical Pluralism, Ethics, Ethics, Metaethics, Metaethics, Moral Psychology, Moral Psychology, Morality, Morality, Nietzsche, Nietzsche, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy 10 Comments »Force and Reason
October 21st, 2011 Daniel Fincke In previous posts (like Rational Passional Persuasion and On Zealously, Tentatively, and Perspectivally Holding Viewpoints) I have argued that there is a proper place for emotional appeals as part of a rational argument. In the last couple of weeks, though, I have also argued firmly against certain kinds of emotional appeals that I consider abusive, counter-productive, and hypocritical [...]
Posted in Applied Ethics, Applied Ethics, Authority, Authority, Autonomy, Autonomy, Contemporary Ethics, Contemporary Ethics, Epistemic Justification, Epistemic Justification, Epistemology, Epistemology, Ethics, Ethics, Moral Psychology, Moral Psychology, Morality, Morality, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy, Virtues, Virtues Tags: Coercion, Emotional Appeals, Emotional Persuasion, Emotions in Reason, Emotivism, Force of Reason, Manipulation, Objective Valuing, Perspectivalism, Persuasion, Rational Appeals, Rational Force, Rational Persuasion, Rationality, Reason and Emotion, Subjective Valuing, Values 15 Comments »A Debate About The Wisdom of Trying To Deconvert People
October 20th, 2011 Daniel Fincke Jaime: So I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how best to debate the existence of God with religious believers… Kelly: Why would you do that? Jaime: Do what? Kelly: Debate the existence of God with religious believers. What’s the point in that? Jaime: What do you mean, “what’s the point?” We live in the [...]
Posted in Applied Ethics, Applied Ethics, Arguments Against The Existence of God, Arguments Against The Existence of God, Arguments for the Existence of God, Arguments for the Existence of God, Atheism, Atheism, Atheism, Atheistic Ethics, Atheistic Ethics, Authority, Authority, Autonomy, Autonomy, Christianity, Christianity, Cultural Secularism, Cultural Secularism, Intellectual Vices, Intellectual Vices, Intellectual Virtues, Intellectual Virtues, New Atheism, New Atheism, New Atheism, New Atheism, Philosophy Of Religion, Pope Benedict XVI, Pope Benedict XVI, Religion, Religion, Religious Extremism, Religious Extremism, Religious Moderates, Religious Moderates, Roman Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Church, Secularism Tags: Debate With Believers, Deconverting, Why Debate Believers? 14 Comments »Nietzsche's Immoralism As Rebellion Against The Authoritarian Tendencies Of Moralities
August 21st, 2011 Daniel Fincke Nietzsche casts himself, quite provocatively, as an “immoralist”. In this post, I want to make clear what Nietzsche means by this term as a first step towards understanding the exact nature and scope of his hostility to morality. As should already be apparent to longtime Camels With Hammers readers, I am optimistic about philosophy’s possibilities [...]
Posted in Authority, Authority, Autonomy, Autonomy, Ethical Pluralism, Ethical Pluralism, Ethics, Ethics, Featured, Historical Ethics, Historical Ethics, Historical Philosophy, Historical Philosophy, Metaethics, Metaethics, Morality, Morality, Nietzsche, Nietzsche, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy Tags: Authoritarianism, Beyond Good and Evil 202, Daybreak 3, Hypocrisy, Immoralism, Will To Power 306, Will To Power 308 2 Comments »Dawkins Against Religion's Claim To Superiority Because It Offers Absolute Morality
February 24th, 2011 Daniel Fincke This is one of the most concise, eloquent, and accurate statements on the problem with religious absolutism in morality and the superiority of secular, non-absolutist approaches to morality I have ever heard. And it is certainly Dawkins’s best 2 and a half minutes on the topic of morality I have ever heard: Thanks to Lucy. [...]
Posted in Atheism, Atheism, Atheism, Atheist Videos, Atheist Videos, Atheistic Ethics, Atheistic Ethics, Authority, Authority, Bible, Bible, Christianity, Contemporary Ethics, Contemporary Ethics, Ethical Pluralism, Ethical Pluralism, Ethics, Ethics, Fundamentalism, Fundamentalism, Islam, Islam, Koran, Koran, Metaethics, Metaethics, New Atheism, New Atheism, New Atheism, New Atheism, Philosophy, Philosophy Of Religion, Religion, Religion, Secularism, Videos Tags: Absolute Morality, Non-Absolute Morality, Richard Dawkins 2 Comments »The Religious Conservative's False Choice: "Big Brother" Or "Heavenly Father"
February 23rd, 2011 Daniel Fincke In an e-mail to me, Caroline proposes thought provoking reasons for non-believers to encourage (or at least to not actively discourage) religious beliefs: It would also be nice if people would carry out actions in good conscience of just being decent human beings rather than in fear of reprisal in the afterlife, but as there [...]
Posted in Applied Ethics, Applied Ethics, Atheism, Atheism, Atheistic Ethics, Atheistic Ethics, Authoritarianism, Authoritarianism, Authority, Authority, Autonomy, Autonomy, Christianity, Christianity, Civil Liberties, Civil Liberties, Contemporary Ethics, Contemporary Ethics, Cultural Secularism, Cultural Secularism, Duty, Duty, Ethics, Ethics, Featured, Fundamentalism, Fundamentalism, George W. Bush, George W. Bush, Hypocrisy, Hypocrisy, Law, Law, Law & Politics, Moral Psychology, Moral Psychology, Morality, Morality, New Atheism, New Atheism, New Atheism, New Atheism, News Discussion, News Discussion, Nietzsche, Nietzsche, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy, Philosophy Of Religion, Political Secularism, Political Secularism, Politics, Politics, Psychology, Psychology, Religion, Religion, Religious Extremism, Religious Extremism, Right Wing Politics, Right Wing Politics, Secularism, Social Psychology, Social Psychology, Sociology, Sociology, Theocrats, Theocrats, Torture, Torture, Virtues, Virtues, World Affairs, World Affairs Tags: Political Philosophy, Social Contract, Victor Frankl 3 Comments »Just How Much Control Over Their Children’s Thought Are Parents Entitled To?
January 31st, 2011 Daniel Fincke In reply to yesterday’s open philosophical question whether a Swedish law banning any school, even private ones, from indoctrinating students by teaching their religious tenets as truths (with the ulterior motive of undermining Islamic schools’ abilities to radicalize their students), Mary Young makes a rigorous and eloquent case against such bans well worth highlighting (and [...]
Posted in 'Nuff Said, 'Nuff Said, 'Nuff Said, Applied Ethics, Applied Ethics, Authority, Authority, Autonomy, Autonomy, Christianity, Christianity, Civil Liberties, Civil Liberties, Creationism, Creationism, Cultural Secularism, Cultural Secularism, Education, Featured, Free Speech, Free Speech, Fundamentalism, Fundamentalism, Islam, Islam, Law, Law, Law & Politics, Political Secularism, Political Secularism, Politics, Politics, Racism, Religion, Religion, Religious Rights, Religious Rights, Right Wing Politics, Right Wing Politics, Roman Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Church, Secularism, Separation of Church and State, Separation of Church and State Tags: Dogma, Dogmatism, Homeschooling, Indoctrination, Islamophobia, Parents' Rights 21 Comments »I Am A Moral Naturalist, Not A Subjectivist
January 20th, 2011 Daniel Fincke In a long comment on my post from this morning, George raised the question of usage of “subjectivism” beyond my own interpretation of the word. Let’s look to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, which should be as neutral an adjudicating source as the English-speaking philosophy world has. I selected this source for its independent, encyclopedia character [...]
Posted in Atheism, Atheism, Atheistic Ethics, Atheistic Ethics, Authority, Authority, Contemporary Ethics, Contemporary Ethics, Ethical Pluralism, Ethical Pluralism, Ethics, Ethics, Featured, Metaethics, Metaethics, Morality, Morality, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophical Ethics, Teleology, Teleology Tags: Divine Command Theory, Moral Relativism, Moral Subjectivism, Objectivist Relativism, Subjectivist Relativism, Voluntarism 7 Comments »How Morality Can Change Through Objective Processes And In Objectively Defensible Ways
January 20th, 2011 Daniel Fincke Jason of Lousy Canuck thinks I am quibbling over semantics in complaining about his characterization of morality as essentially “subjective” and he wants me to clarify how my position diverges in substance from his own. Answering his questions and his formulations may prove a fruitful way to clarify my own positions. So, here goes. He [...]
Posted in Atheism, Atheism, Atheistic Ethics, Atheistic Ethics, Authority, Authority, Contemporary Ethics, Contemporary Ethics, Ethical Pluralism, Ethical Pluralism, Ethics, Ethics, Featured, Metaethics, Metaethics, Moral Psychology, Moral Psychology, Morality, Morality, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy, Religion, Religion, Virtues, Virtues 14 Comments »Towards Atheistic Religions (Or Away From Them, Depending On How You Define “Religions”)
July 13th, 2010 Daniel Fincke In a rare occurrence, I am being taken to task for giving religion too much credit and atheists too little! Here are the offending paragraphs I wrote on Friday: I would say that various practices called religious, if stripped of all their dogmatism, traditionalism, literalism, and authoritarianism, can and do certainly coexist with and complement science [...]
Posted in Applied Ethics, Applied Ethics, Atheism, Atheism, Atheistic Ethics, Atheistic Ethics, Authority, Authority, Christianity, Christianity, Contemporary Ethics, Contemporary Ethics, Cultural Secularism, Cultural Secularism, Ethics, Ethics, Featured, New Atheism, New Atheism, New Atheism, New Atheism, Philosophy, Philosophy Of Religion, Religion, Religion and Science, Religious Moderates, Religious Moderates, Religious Secularism, Religious Secularism, Roman Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Church, Secularism No Comments »Disambiguating Faith: Defending My Definition Of Faith As “Belief Or Trust Beyond Rational Warrant”
July 5th, 2010 Daniel Fincke Last week I responded to David Crowther’s argument that we should equally consider all beliefs that are not 100% certain to be “faith beliefs”. I argued that the word “belief” already covers the fact that we are fallible human beings and as such even our most nearly 100% certain propositions about the world are always [...]
Posted in Authority, Authority, Disambiguating Faith, Disambiguating Faith, Epistemic Justification, Epistemic Justification, Epistemology, Epistemology, Faith, Faith, Featured, Intellectual Vices, Intellectual Vices, Intellectual Virtues, Intellectual Virtues, Philosophy, Philosophy Of Religion, Religion, Religion Tags: Faith As Loyalty, Faith as Trust, Loyalty, Trust, Trustworthiness, Volition, Volitional Disposition, Volitional Faith 9 Comments »A Dictatorship Of Relativism?
July 3rd, 2010 Daniel Fincke BBC Radio 4 analyzes the pope’s catchphrase, “a dictatorship of relativism”, used for describing the secular West. Here’s the program description: The idea that no one has a monopoly on the truth seems to be fixed in the modern Western psyche. But it’s an idea that is under attack. Pope Benedict claims that we are [...]
Posted in Authority, Authority, Contemporary Ethics, Contemporary Ethics, Cultural Secularism, Cultural Secularism, Culture, Cutural Criticism, Cutural Criticism, Ethics, Ethics, Fundamentalism, Fundamentalism, Islam, Islam, Metaethics, Metaethics, Morality, Morality, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy, Political Secularism, Political Secularism, Politics, Politics, Pope Benedict XVI, Pope Benedict XVI, Religion, Religion, Roman Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Church, Secularism, Separation of Church and State, Separation of Church and State, World Affairs, World Affairs Tags: Ann Widdecombe, Europe, Leslie Green, Marcello Pera, Moral Aboslutism, Moral Relativism, Rowan Williams, Ruzwan Mohammed, Simon Blackburn, Stephen Wang, United Kingdom No Comments »Disambiguating Faith: Why Faith Is Unethical (Or “In Defense Of The Ethical Obligation To Always Proportion Belief To Evidence”)
June 21st, 2010 Daniel Fincke A couple of weeks ago, I argued that there was a real distinction between “lacking a belief in any God or gods” on the one hand and “believing there is no God (or gods)” on the other hand. Primarily I saw the heart of the distinction as resting with the difference between on the one [...]
Posted in Applied Ethics, Atheism, Atheistic Ethics, Authority, Autonomy, Contemporary Ethics, Cultural Secularism, Disambiguating Faith, Duty, Epistemic Justification, Epistemology, Ethical Pluralism, Ethics, Evidence, Faith, Featured, Intellectual Vices, Intellectual Virtues, Law, Metaethics, Morality, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy, Political Secularism, Politics, Rationalism, Religion, Religious Extremism, Secularism, Separation of Church and State, Skepticism, Teleology, Virtues, Why I Am Not A Christian Tags: Agnostic Atheism, Agnostic Theism, Belief, Belief Apportioned To Evidence, Evolutionary Epistemology, Evolutionary Ethics, Gnostic Atheism, Gnostic Theism, Indirect Consequentialism, Moral Formalism, Moral Rationalism, Principle of Sufficient Reason, Rational Belief 10 Comments »Some Suspicions About The Superiority Of Liberal Moral Values
June 18th, 2010 Daniel Fincke Earlier today, I drew attention to Greta Christina’s article formulating some ideas she picked up from Rebecca Newberger Goldstein. If you have already read either or both of those posts, you can just skip the next two paragraphs meant to catch up new readers. The Goldstein/Greta Christina argument built off of Jonathan Haidt’s theory of [...]
Posted in Authority, Autonomy, Contemporary Ethics, Ethical Pluralism, Ethics, Evolution, Evolutionary Psychology, Featured, Hypocrisy, Metaethics, Moral Psychology, Morality, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy, Prejudice, Psychology, Social Psychology, Social Sciences, Sociobiology, Sociology, Teleology, Virtues Tags: Conservative Values, Flourishing, Greta Christina, Hierarchy, Impartiality, In-group Loyalty, Jonathan Haidt, Liberal Values, Loyalty, Moral Modules, Moral Universalism, Purity, Rebecca Goldstein, Universalism No Comments »True And False In Adam And Eve
June 14th, 2010 Daniel Fincke Yesterday I replied to Mary Midgley’s article out this weekend, which claimed that evolutionary theory does not refute Genesis since Genesis was not meant to be a literal description of how God made the world. In reply I revisted remarks and videos that I posted last fall which overviewed the ways that even if we [...]
Moral Actions, Moral Sentiments, Moral Motives, and Moral Justifications: More On The Nun Excommunicated For Approving A Life-Saving Abortion
May 18th, 2010 Daniel Fincke In reply to my post on the story of Sister Margaret McBride whom the Catholic Church “automatically excommunicated” for helping to give the go-ahead to an abortion claimed necessary for saving the life of an 11 week pregnant mother, I have already received two interesting replies. The first challenged the medical argument for the necessity of [...]
Posted in Abortion, Applied Ethics, Authority, Autonomy, Bio-Medical Ethics, Christianity, Contemporary Ethics, Duty, Ethics, Featured, Feminism, Metaethics, Moral Psychology, Morality, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy, Religion, Roman Catholic Church, Secularism, Teleology, Virtues, Women's Issues Tags: Action Theory, Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted, Consequentialism, Doctrine of Double Effect, Excommunication, John Garvie, Moral Judgment, Moral Justification, Moral Motivation, Moral Sentiments, Phoenix Archdiocese, Sister Margaret McBride, Vice, Vicious Motives, Vicious Sentiments, Virtue Ethics 5 Comments »A Challenge To Christians To Unqualifiedly Condemn Genocide
November 10th, 2009 Daniel Fincke Christians who defend the Old Testament genocides are guilty of either relativistic authoritarianism (anything can be okay as long as God wills it and His will has simply changed from the Old Testament days to the New Testament one) or, possibly worse, theoretical agreement with all the normal justifications of genocide as long as God [...]
Posted in Atheism, Atheist Videos, Atheistic Ethics, Authority, Bible, Christianity, Ethics, Fundamentalism, God, Hypocrisy, Moral Psychology, Morality, New Atheism, Philosophy, Religion, Religious Extremism, Religious Moderates, Secularism Tags: Biblical Atrocities, Biblical Genocide, Biblical Violence, genocide, Religious Authoritarianism, Religious Relativism, Religious Violence, ZJemptv 10 Comments »Is Reason My God 4: On Reason As An Authority
October 13th, 2009 Daniel Fincke Even though this post is “part 4″ of a reply to the same commentator, it can be understood without reading prior installments. If you would like to catch up with prior installments nonetheless, here are parts 1, 2, and 3. In reply to this post, Grant writes: Appealing to the authority of reason is the [...]
Posted in Authority, Epistemic Justification, Epistemology, Evidence, Faith, Featured, God, Intellectual Vices, Intellectual Virtues, Philosophy Tags: Reason No Comments »Philosophical Ethics: “But Why MUST I?” Kant’s Ironic Formulation Of Liberty As Duty
October 4th, 2009 Daniel Fincke In a series of posts this semester, I am going to blog all (or almost all) the lecture topics for the two Philosophical Ethics classes I am teaching this semester. Each of these posts will primarily explicate the reading or a theme that dominated class discussion in a way that should be accessible to novices [...]
Posted in Authority, Autonomy, Duty, Ethics, Featured, Historical Ethics, Historical Philosophy, Philosophical Ethics, Philosophy, Secularism Tags: Deontology, Kant, Nietzsche, Rational Action, Reason No Comments »
Recent Comments