6 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Luke Gelinas [5]Luke C. Gelinas [1]
See also:
Profile: Luke Gelinas
  1. Luke Gelinas (forthcoming). Frames, Choice-Reversal, and Consent. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice:1-9.
    Recently Jason Hanna has argued that a particular type of susceptibility to framing effects—namely, the tendency to reverse one’s choice between certain logically equivalent frames—invalidates actual tokens of consent. Here I argue that this claim is false: proneness to choice-reversal per se between the relevant types of frames does not invalidate consent.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Bruce D. White, Luke C. Gelinas & Wayne N. Shelton (2015). In Particular Circumstances Attempting Unproven Interventions Is Permissible and Even Obligatory. American Journal of Bioethics 15 (4):53-55.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Franklin G. Miller & Luke Gelinas (2013). Nudging, Autonomy, and Valid Consent: Context Matters. American Journal of Bioethics 13 (6):12-13.
  4. Klaas Kraay & Luke Gelinas (2010). God, the Best, and Evil – Bruce Langtry. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (239):432-446.
  5. Luke Gelinas (2009). The Problem of Natural Evil II: Hybrid Replies. Philosophy Compass 4 (3):560-574.
    I consider two views that combine different elements of general theistic replies to natural evil, those of Peter van Inwagen and William Hasker. I end with a Hasker-style defense – one that, unlike Hasker's, denies the existence of pointless natural evils – and some brief observations on the direction of future debate.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Luke Gelinas (2009). The Problem of Natural Evil I: General Theistic Replies. Philosophy Compass 4 (3):533-559.
    I examine different strategies involved in stating anti-theistic arguments from natural evil, and consider some theistic replies. There are, traditionally, two main types of arguments from natural evil: those that purport to deduce a contradiction between the existence of natural evil and the existence of God, and those that claim that the existence of certain types or quantities of natural evil significantly lowers the probability that theism is true. After considering peripheral replies, I state four prominent theistic rebutting strategies: skeptical (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation