David Boonin has written the most thorough and detailed case for the moral permissibility of abortion yet published. Critically examining a wide range of arguments that attempt to prove that every human fetus has a right to life, he shows that each of these arguments fails on its own terms. He then explains how even if the fetus does have a right to life, abortion can still be shown to be morally permissible on the critique of abortion's own terms. Finally he considers several pro-life arguments that do not depend on claims that the fetus has a right to life and concludes that these too are ultimately unsuccessful. This major book will be especially helpful to those teaching applied ethics and bioethics in philosophy departments or professional schools of law and medicine. It will interest students of women studies and general readers for whom abortion remains a high-profile issue.

/pdf/a-defense-of-abortion-3udwvgerz3.pdf

A defense of abortion

In this book, Graham Oppy examines arguments for and against the existence of God. He shows that none of these arguments is powerful enough to change the minds of reasonable participants in debates on the question of the existence of God. His conclusion is supported by detailed analyses of the arguments as well as by the development of a theory about the purpose of arguments and the criteria that should be used in judging whether or not arguments are successful. Oppy discusses the work of a wide array of philosophers, including Anselm, Aquinas, Descartes, Locke, Leibniz, Kant, Hume and, more recently, Plantinga, Dembski, White, Dawkins, Bergman, Gale and Pruss.

Arguing about gods

BIBLICAL SOURCES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONCEPT OF THE SOUL IN THE WRITINGS OF THE FATHERS OF THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH, 100-325 C.E.

/pdf/biblical-sources-in-the-development-of-the-concept-of-the-29b3gbp3d4.pdf

Biblical Sources in the Development of the Concept of the Soul in the Writings of the Fathers of the Early Christian church, 100-325 C.E.

Part I. Acceptability: Dialectical and Epistemological Considerations: 1. Why do we need a theory of acceptability? 2. Acceptability and presumption 3. Factors determining presumption: basic considerations 4. Epistemological considerations: acceptability, deontology, internalism, justification Part II. Statements, Belief-Generating Mechanisms, and Presumptive Reliability: 5. What types of statements are there? 6. Necessary statements and a priori intuition 7. Descriptions and their belief-generating mechanisms 8. Interpretations and their modes of intuition 9. Evaluations and the moral faculties 10. Taking one's word: the interpersonal belief-generating mechanism Part III. Practice and Perspective: 11. An outline of the practice of epistemic causistry 12. Theoretical considerations: a common sense foundationalism.

Acceptable Premises: An Epistemic Approach to an Informal Logic Problem

.....................................................................................................i Acknowledgements........................................................................................ii

Klytaimestra: Genetic and Gender Conflict in Greek Tragedy

In this paper we present an analysis of the subjunctive conditional.* Included are both a semantics for and a complete axiomatization of a system which consists of the propositional calculus extended by the addition of an operator symbol representing the subjunctive conditional. We prove that this system is equivalent to the system T of modal logic [9]. We also compare our system with previous analyses of the subjunctive conditional, both of the consequentialist or metalinguistic approach and of the possible worlds cum similarity variety. We argue that our system preserves the best of both treatments. In particular, it involves a notion of similarity among possible worlds without incurring the problems Lewis has encountered or incorporating counterintuitive theorems. We also consider certain subjunctive fallacies. It becomes clear under what special conditions transitivity and contraposition do hold for the subjunctive conditional and why under other conditions they fail.

/pdf/an-analysis-of-the-subjunctive-conditional-jtm0wovr47.pdf

An analysis of the subjunctive conditional

In defining dramatic tragedy Aristotle appeals in part to the psychological notions of pity, fear, and catharsis. The question to be addressed in this paper is whether in Aristotle's analysis the production of pity, fear, and a catharsis of these emotions in audiences-readers, auditors, or viewers-is essential to works of dramatic tragedy, or at least good works of dramatic tragedy. We follow Else 1956, 1986 in hold that it is not. Topics concerning pity, fear, and especially catharsis are some of the most frequently discussed in the literature on Aristotle's analysis of tragedy. But very rarely in this literature is it stated in so many words that the above question is the one under discussion. Fortenbaugh 1975 and Randall 1960 definitely do come down on the opposite side, interpreting Aristotle as holding that the production of these psychological effects by a dramatic work is essential to its being at least a good tragedy. Many many commentators, among them Brunius 1966, Butcher 1895 (Ch. VI, especially p. 244), Fergusson 1961 (pp. 34-36), Halliwell 1986, 1987 (especially p. 91), and Ross 1953 (pp. 287-289), while not explicitly saying so, give a strong impression that they too subscribe to this view. After all, for Aristotle the aim of dramatic tragedy is to effect a catharsis of the emotions of pity and fear; hence it seems natural to conclude that the degree to which this is accomplished is the measure of the quality of a work. Unfortunately, it is almost never crystal clear that this is indeed the topic under discussion, rather than some other involving pity, fear, and catharsis-for example, what feelings of pity, fear, and catharsis are, or what elements in tragedies produce them. Of course, tragedies do attract and move audiences. They do have psychological effects. Audience reactions to plays are taken as evidence of their quality. But whether theater works have to have such effects to be tragedies, or good ones, is a different issue. Nonetheless it is our impression,

Pity, fear, and catharsis in Aristotle's poetics

https://projecteuclid.org/download/pdf_1/euclid.ndjfl/1093636614

A story semantics for implication.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0012217300016164

Having a Future

Confrontation de l'argument theiste de la theodicee, repondant au probleme du mal, a l'argument anti-theiste de la demonodicee, repondant au probleme du bien. Examinant la these isomorphique selon laquelle les arguments en faveur de la consistance et l'existence de Dieu doivent inclure des arguments contre l'existence et la consistance du demon (E. Stein, in «American philosophical quarterly, 27, 1990, p. 164), l'A. defend l'analyse du bien et la definition du mal comme ignorance developpee par Platon dans le «Gorgias»

Charles B. Daniels

Papers

An analysis of the subjunctive conditional

Pity, fear, and catharsis in Aristotle's poetics

A story semantics for implication.

Having a Future

God, demon, good, evil