An epistemic argument for tolerance
In this paper I first take a critical look at Grube’s allegiance to the idea that bivalence should be rejected as it can serve the cause of religious toleration. I argue that bivalence is not what Grube says it is, and that rejection of bivalence comes at a very high price that we should not be will...
| 主要作者: | |
|---|---|
| 格式: | Electronic/Print Article |
| 語言: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | 載入...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| 出版: |
Taylor & Francis
[2016]
|
| In: |
International journal of philosophy and theology
Year: 2015, 卷: 76, 發布: 5, Pages: 428-435 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
宗教
/ 證明正當 (哲學)
/ Religiöse Toleranz
/ 二值原理
|
| IxTheo Classification: | AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism AX Inter-religious relations |
| 在線閱讀: |
Presumably Free Access Volltext (doi) |
| 總結: | In this paper I first take a critical look at Grube’s allegiance to the idea that bivalence should be rejected as it can serve the cause of religious toleration. I argue that bivalence is not what Grube says it is, and that rejection of bivalence comes at a very high price that we should not be willing to pay. Next I analyze Grube’s argument for religious toleration - an argument that does not involve the rejection of bivalence. I argue that the argument is unconvincing because there exists no relation between epistemic justification and toleration. (I also note problems with the notion of "justification" as used by Grube.) |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2169-2327 |
| Reference: | Kritik von "Justified religious difference (2016)"
Kritik in "Reply to the respondents to "Justified religious difference: a constructive approach to religious diversity" (2016)" |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: International journal of philosophy and theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2015.1133315 |