Promising Paths and Dead Ends in Evolutionary Theodicy

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
M. Wahlberg
{"title":"Promising Paths and Dead Ends in Evolutionary Theodicy","authors":"M. Wahlberg","doi":"10.1515/nzsth-2023-0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article, I first reflect on the background of the debate between myself and Eikrem and Søvik and make some clarificatory remarks about the term “Only Way argument”, which figured in the article that started the exchange. I then map areas of agreement and disagreement between us, with an eye to discerning promising and less promising paths forward in the field of evolutionary theodicy. Finally, I respond to Eikrem’s and Søvik’s criticism of my previous arguments about token-goods.","PeriodicalId":51975,"journal":{"name":"NEUE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SYSTEMATISCHE THEOLOGIE UND RELIGIONSPHILOSOPHIE","volume":"65 1","pages":"44 - 54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NEUE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SYSTEMATISCHE THEOLOGIE UND RELIGIONSPHILOSOPHIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/nzsth-2023-0015","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In this article, I first reflect on the background of the debate between myself and Eikrem and Søvik and make some clarificatory remarks about the term “Only Way argument”, which figured in the article that started the exchange. I then map areas of agreement and disagreement between us, with an eye to discerning promising and less promising paths forward in the field of evolutionary theodicy. Finally, I respond to Eikrem’s and Søvik’s criticism of my previous arguments about token-goods.
进化神正论中的希望之路和死胡同
摘要在这篇文章中,我首先反思了我与Eikrem和Søvik之间辩论的背景,并对开始交流的文章中出现的“唯一途径的争论”一词发表了一些明确的评论。然后,我绘制了我们之间一致和不一致的领域,着眼于在进化神权领域辨别有希望和不太有希望的前进道路。最后,我回应了Eikrem和søvik对我之前关于代币商品的论点的批评。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie which is published in three annual issues of 112 pages each, examines the exciting dialogue between Lutheran-Reformed theology and philosophy in the broadest sense, seeks to keep open a breadth of responsible thought in the controversial issue of contemporary theology, and offers a variety of ways to formulate questions. Through its international editorial board, it guarantees an exchange of theological research in German and English. Each issue features a review of periodicals which serve to keep the reader abreast of new research in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信