Faith and Philosophy 23 (2):169-190 (2006)
|Abstract||The existence and extent of animal suffering provides grounds for a serious evidential challenge to theism. In the wake of the Darwinian revolution, this strain of natural atheology has taken on substantially greater significance. In this essay we argue that there are at least four neo-Cartesian views on the nature of animal minds which would serve to deflect this evidential challenge.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Andrew Linzey (2009). Why Animal Suffering Matters: Philosophy, Theology, and Practical Ethics. Oxford University Press.
C. Robert Mesle (2009). Michael J. Murray, Nature Red in Tooth and Claw: Theism and the Problem of Animal Suffering. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 66 (3):173-177.
Sydney Shoemaker (2008). Persons, Animals, and Identity. Synthese 162 (3):313 - 324.
Adam Shriver (2009). Knocking Out Pain in Livestock: Can Technology Succeed Where Morality has Stalled? Neuroethics 2 (3).
B. Bermond (2001). A Neuropsychological and Evolutionary Approach to Animal Consciousness and Animal Suffering. Animal Welfare Supplement 10:47- 62.
T. J. Mawson (2009). Nature Red in Tooth and Claw: Theism and the Problem of Animal Suffering, by Michael Murray. Mind 118 (471):855-858.
Nathan Nobis (2002). The Real Problem of Infant and Animal Suffering. Philo 5 (2):216-225.
Glenn Ross (2006). Neo-Cartesianism and the Problem of Animal Suffering. Faith and Philosophy 23 (2):169-190.
Michael J. Murray (2008). Nature Red in Tooth and Claw: Theism and the Problem of Animal Suffering. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads36 ( #33,034 of 549,122 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,361 of 549,122 )
How can I increase my downloads?