Motives Still Don't Matter: Reply to Pynes

Zygon 47 (4):662-665 (2012)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
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.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
KOPMSD
Revision history
Archival date: 2012-11-20
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2012-11-21

Total views
413 ( #6,478 of 39,647 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
27 ( #17,822 of 39,647 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.