Reply to Crites and Hauerwas
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8207552 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Julian N Hartt (corresponding author), JULIAN HARTT |
| Year | 1984 |
| Volume | 52 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 149-155 |
| Publication date | 1984-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of the American Academy of Religion (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0002-7189 • E-ISSN: 1477-4585 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/jaarel/lii.1.149 |
| OpenAlex | W2001609693 |
| Language | EN |
Stephen Crites and Stanley Hauerwas have richly honored me by taking my comments on their views with such seriousness. It is gratifying though not at all surprising that neither of them looks for cheap victories nor pursues implausible reconciliations of important disagreements. I thank them for these attitudinal benefactions as well as for their instructive comments on my views. Would that my besetting modesty allowed me to accept Crites's unilateral nomination of me for associate membership in the Royal German Theological Union! It appears that the main points at issue are these: (I) What sort of distinction is to be drawn between fact-assertive (assertoric) and expressive modes of cognitivity (understood: for Christian faith and theology)? (II) What about metaphysics? (III) Truth v. Truthfulness. (The understanding cited in I applies to II and III.)
Art · Philosophy · Religion, Theology, and Education · Theology and Philosophy of Evil
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |