Motives Still Don't Matter: Reply to Pynes
Zygon 47 (4):662-665 (2012)
Abstract
This paper continues a dialogue that began with an
article by Jeffrey Koperski entitled “Two Bad Ways to Attack
Intelligent Design and Two Good Ones,” published in the June 2008
issue of Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science. In a response article,
Christopher Pynes argues that ad hominem arguments are sometimes
legitimate, especially when critiquing Intelligent Design (2012). We
show that Pynes’s examples only apply to matters of testimony, not
the kinds of arguments found in the best defenses of ID.
Keywords
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
KOPMSD
Upload history
Archival date: 2012-11-20
View other versions
View other versions
Added to PP index
2012-11-21
Total views
587 ( #7,954 of 55,933 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
47 ( #16,395 of 55,933 )
2012-11-21
Total views
587 ( #7,954 of 55,933 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
47 ( #16,395 of 55,933 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.