15 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Brian Zamulinski [14]Brian Edward Zamulinski [1]
  1. Brian Zamulinski (2014). Hypocrisy and the Nature of Belief. Ratio 27 (3).
    We know that someone is a hypocrite when he acts inconsistently with his purported beliefs. Understanding how we know it is an essential aspect of understanding the nature of belief. We can recognize the phenomenon when beliefs are ‘inscribed’ in the brain, there is a disposition to maintain consistency among the propositions represented by the ‘inscriptions’, and the inscriptions and the disposition give rise to derivative disinclinations. Since the disinclinations ought to prevent certain actions, we notice the conflict between the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Brian Zamulinski (2010). God, Evil, and Evolution. European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 2 (2):201 - 217.
    Most evil is compatible with the existence of God if He has an aim that He can achieve only by using an unguided process of evolution and if He cannot be condemned for trying to achieve His aim. It is argued that there is an aim that could reasonably be attributed to God and that God cannot achieve it without using evolution. There are independent grounds for thinking an evolutionary response is necessary if God is to be defended at all. (...)
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Brian Zamulinski (2010). Reconciling Reason and Religion: A Response to Peels. Religious Studies 46 (1):109-113.
    In 'The ethics of belief and Christian faith as commitment to assumptions', Rik Peels attacks the views that I advanced in 'Christianity and the ethics of belief'. Here, I rebut his criticisms of the claim that it is wrong to believe without sufficient evidence, of the contention that Christians are committed to that claim, and of the notion of that faith is not belief but commitment to assumptions in the hope of salvation. My original conclusions still stand.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Brian Zamulinski (2008). Christianity and the Ethics of Belief. Religious Studies 44 (3):333-346.
    The ethics of belief does not justify condemning all possible forms of religion even in the absence of evidence for any of them or the presence of evidence against all of them. It follows that attacks on religion like the recent one by Richard Dawkins must fail. The reason is not that there is something wrong with the ethics of belief but that Christian faith need not be a matter of beliefs but can instead be a matter of assumptions to (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Brian Zamulinski (2008). How Libertarianism Opposes Coercive Capitalism: A Reply to Silver. Dialogue 47 (01):137-.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Brian Edward Zamulinski (2007). Evolutionary Intuitionism: A Theory of the Origin and Nature of Moral Facts. Mcgill-Queen's University Press.
    It seems impossible that organisms selected to maximize their genetic legacy could also be moral agents in a world in which taking risks for strangers is sometimes morally laudable. Brian Zamulinski argues that it is possible if morality is an evolutionary by-product rather than an adaptation.Evolutionary Intuitionism presents a new evolutionary theory of human morality. Zamulinski explains the evolution of foundational attitudes, whose relationships to acts constitute moral facts. With foundational attitudes and the resulting moral facts in place, he shows (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Brian Zamulinski (2005). Noziek's Anachronistic Libertarianism. Dialogue 44 (2):211-223.
    The conclusions on libertarianism Robert Nozick reaches are appropriate for a bygone era. In a modern market economy, libertarianism requires that employable people have the option of taking up a publicly provided income instead of employment. This is the only way to compensate the involuntarily unemployed that a market economy requires and to ensure that all employment is voluntary. Taxation on voluntary exchanges is unobjectionable because it alters prices, not property, and no one has a right to a particular price. (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Brian Zamulinski (2005). Rejoinder to Scott. Religious Studies 41 (2):225-229.
    Michael Scott attacks my use of likelihood in assessing two explanations for human religion. He assumes that I rely on likelihood alone. He is attacking a straw man. We have no alternative but to rely on likelihood when the probabilities of two competing hypotheses are identical, as I charitably assumed with respect to the hypotheses I discussed. His other criticisms likewise miss the mark.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Brian Zamulinski (2004). A Defense of the Ethics of Belief. Philo 7 (1):79-96.
    This paper is a defense and elaboration of W.K. Clifford's argument in "The Ethics of Belief.".
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Brian Zamulinski (2004). Rejoinder to Mawson. Religious Studies 40 (3):365-366.
    In reply to Mawson, I accept that each and every religion includes the self-referential belief that it is true. I seek to show that this admission does not entail that the rest of the beliefs of religions track the truth or that they are not better explained through the religion-as-fiction hypothesis. If that hypothesis is well-grounded, it gives us good reason not to take arguments for religions' non-self-referential beliefs seriously. (Published Online August 11 2004).
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Brian Zamulinski (2003). Religion and the Pursuit of Truth. Religious Studies 39 (1):43-60.
    This is a new argument to the effect that religions are not truth-oriented. In other words, it is not a fundamental function of religion to represent the world accurately. I compare two hypotheses with respect to their likelihood (in A. W. F. Edwards's technical sense). The one which entails that religion is not truth-oriented is a better explanation than its competitor for a number of empirical observations about religion. It is also at least as probable. I point out that, once (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Brian Zamulinski (2002). A Re-Evaluation of Clifford and His Critics. Southern Journal of Philosophy 40 (3):437-457.
    This paper re-evaluates W.K. Clifford on the ethics of belief in light of criticism due to William James and replies to James from David A. Hollinger.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Brian Zamulinski (2001). Aquinas's Theory of Natural Law in the Light of Evolution. Philo 4 (1):21-37.
    The main claim here is that Aquinas’s theory of natural law is false because it is incompatible with the occurrence of evolution by variation and natural selection. This contradicts the Thomist opinion that there is no conflict between the two. The conflict is deep and pervasive, involving the core elements of Aquinas’s theory. The problematic elements include: 1) the fundamental precept that good should be done and pursued, and evil avoided; 2) the claim that every organism aims at the good (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Brian Zamulinski (1995). Stephen Gaukroger University of Sydney. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 73 (2).
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Brian Zamulinski (1994). C. Behan McCullagh La Trobe University. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 72 (3).
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation