How to Fail to Debunk Animism
Perry Hendricks argues that my common consent argument for animism fails. The failure, he argues, comes down to the fact that there is widespread agreement in non-animism. Were animism correct, then it is improbable, argues Hendricks, that animism would ever be unpopular. Hendricks’ argument is prem...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
MDPI
2022
|
| In: |
Religions
Year: 2022, Volume: 13, Issue: 7 |
| Further subjects: | B
Animism
B Social epistemology B Disagreement B common consent arguments |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1811956289 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20220729052608.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 220729s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.3390/rel13070634 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1811956289 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1811956289 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 0 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Smith, Tiddy |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 109 | |a Smith, Tiddy | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a How to Fail to Debunk Animism |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Perry Hendricks argues that my common consent argument for animism fails. The failure, he argues, comes down to the fact that there is widespread agreement in non-animism. Were animism correct, then it is improbable, argues Hendricks, that animism would ever be unpopular. Hendricks’ argument is premised on several problematic assumptions, which I attempt to address. Once these assumptions are exposed, it is clear that Hendricks’ argument is weaker than it first appears, leaving my position relatively unscathed. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Social epistemology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Disagreement | |
| 650 | 4 | |a common consent arguments | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Animism | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Religions |d Basel : MDPI, 2010 |g 13(2022), 7, Artikel-ID 634 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)665435797 |w (DE-600)2620962-7 |w (DE-576)348219067 |x 2077-1444 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:13 |g year:2022 |g number:7 |g elocationid:634 |
| 856 | |u https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/13/7/634/pdf?version=1657245752 |x unpaywall |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang |h publisher [oa journal (via doaj)] | ||
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13070634 |x Resolving-System |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/13/7/634 |x Verlag |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
| 935 | |a mteo | ||
| 936 | u | w | |d 13 |j 2022 |e 7 |i 634 |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 4173659849 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1811956289 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20220729052608 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 220729||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-07-28#20F0C0F67A3D00937ADBABFF3B9720EF7B3B9011 | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a zota | ||
| OAS | |a 1 | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
| REL | |a 1 | ||
| SUB | |a REL | ||