Order:
See also
Luke Golemon
University of Arizona
  1.  27
    Rural Bioethics: The Alaska Context.Fritz Allhoff & Luke Golemon - 2020 - HEC Forum 32 (4):313-331.
    With by far the lowest population density in the United States, myriad challenges attach to healthcare delivery in Alaska. In the “Size, Population, and Accessibility” section, we characterize this geographic context, including how it is exacerbated by lack of infrastructure. In the “Distributing Healthcare” section, we turn to healthcare economics and staffing, showing how these bear on delivery—and are exacerbated by geography. In the “Health Care in Rural Alaska” section, we turn to rural care, exploring in more depth what healthcare (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  2.  27
    Plantinga Redux: Is the Scientific Realist Committed to the Rejection of Naturalism?Abraham Graber & Luke Golemon - 2020 - Sophia 59 (3):395-412.
    While Plantinga has famously argued that acceptance of neo-Darwinian theory commits one to the rejection of naturalism, Plantinga’s argument is vulnerable to an objection developed by Evan Fales. Not only does Fales’ objection undermine Plantinga’s original argument, it establishes a general challenge which any attempt to revitalize Plantinga’s argument must overcome. After briefly laying out the contours of this challenge, we attempt to meet it by arguing that because a purely naturalistic account of our etiology cannot explain the correlation between (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3.  7
    On the Difficulty of the Evolutionary Debunking of Scientific Realism: Graber and Golemon Buttressed.Luke Golemon & Abraham Graber - forthcoming - Sophia:1-7.
    In their recent article, Graber and Golemon argue that any attempted evolutionary debunking of naturalism faces a dilemma. First, in order to be evolutionarily plausible, the skeptical implications must not be too broad. Second, in order to constitute a genuine challenge to scientific realism, the skeptical implications must not be too narrow. Graber and Golemon further develop an evolutionary debunking argument that avoids both horns of this dilemma. De Ray criticizes Graber and Golemon’s debunking argument then develops his own, competing (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark