Survivors of the nations: a response to Fergusson and Pecknold
This paper responds to two article reviews of Democracy and Tradition – one by David Fergusson, the other by C. C. Pecknold. The first part of the paper seeks to clarify the author's critique of Alasdair MacIntyre and Stanley Hauerwas, in particular MacIntyre's claim that our society is in...
| Главный автор: | |
|---|---|
| Формат: | Электронный ресурс Статья |
| Язык: | Английский |
| Проверить наличие: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Опубликовано: |
2006
|
| В: |
Scottish journal of theology
Год: 2006, Том: 59, Выпуск: 2, Страницы: 210-234 |
| Online-ссылка: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Итог: | This paper responds to two article reviews of Democracy and Tradition – one by David Fergusson, the other by C. C. Pecknold. The first part of the paper seeks to clarify the author's critique of Alasdair MacIntyre and Stanley Hauerwas, in particular MacIntyre's claim that our society is inherently incapable of sustaining rational discussion and Hauerwas's conception of what ‘being the church’ implies. The second part defends and extends the author's account of secularization. The third part considers truth, objectivity and the relationship between philosophy and political culture. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1475-3065 |
| Второстепенные работы: | Enthalten in: Scottish journal of theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S0036930606002183 |
