An Edinburgher

Abstract

Andrew Seth Pringle-Pattison touched a number of chords similar to those of other notable moral apologists, while distinguishing himself in a few salient respects. He lauded Kant on the issue of value, tracing that line of argument to focus on the principled reason to side with Kant over Hume on the problem of evil, while being critical of Kant in other respects, particularly in paying God’s immanence inadequate attention. He saw clearly various implications of the moral argument for the character of God, not just on the matter of God’s existence, and he intentionally launched criticisms at David Hume’s narrow empiricism. Pringle-Pattison’s idealism was broad, his epistemology expansive, his empiricism generous. He took religious experience seriously, refusing to privilege the perspective of external bystanders who lacked its rich phenomenology.