Can a Pacifist Have a Conversation with Augustine? A Response to Alain Epp Weaver

Christians have historically differed as to whether the wrongness of an act is to be located in the objective character of the act or in the intention of the agent. By blurring this distinction, Alain Epp Weaver fails to see the real principle of consistency that unites Augustine's analyses of...

Description complète

Enregistré dans:  
Détails bibliographiques
Auteur principal: Johnson, James Turner (Auteur)
Type de support: Électronique Article
Langue:Anglais
Vérifier la disponibilité: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
En cours de chargement...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publié: Wiley-Blackwell 2001
Dans: Journal of religious ethics
Année: 2001, Volume: 29, Numéro: 1, Pages: 87-93
Sujets non-standardisés:B objective evil
B Killing
B Augustine
B lies
B Intention
Accès en ligne: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Édition parallèle:Non-électronique
Description
Résumé:Christians have historically differed as to whether the wrongness of an act is to be located in the objective character of the act or in the intention of the agent. By blurring this distinction, Alain Epp Weaver fails to see the real principle of consistency that unites Augustine's analyses of warfare and lying. Likewise, by not appreciating the fact that Augustine analyzes the wrongness of the act in terms of intention whereas Yoder analyzes its wrongness in terms of its objective character, Weaver proposes a conversation between two figures who lack the framework of shared assumptions that makes engagement in conversation possible.
ISSN:1467-9795
Contient:Enthalten in: Journal of religious ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1111/0384-9694.00069