Subjective-objective dichotomy/External Links

From Citizendium
< Subjective-objective dichotomy
Revision as of 23:39, 16 February 2016 by imported>John R. Brews (Some orientation upon Jone's book)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
A hand-picked, annotated list of Web resources about Subjective-objective dichotomy.
Please sort and annotate in a user-friendly manner and consider archiving the URLs behind the links you provide. See also related web sources.
  • Steven Pinker, Leon Wieseltier (September 26, 2013). Science vs. the humanities: Round III. New Republic. Pinker-Wieseltier debate Part III. Pinker: "Good ideas can come from any source, and they must be evaluated on their cogency"; Wieseltier: "I am for a two-state solution. In this arena of tension, as in the other one, I believe that a one-state solution would involve the erasure of one of the realms, its distortion by, and subordination to, an authority that has no legitimate claim over it."
  • James W. Jones (2015). “Chapter 4: Beyond Reductive Physicalism: Mind and Nature”, Can Science Explain Religion?: The Cognitive Science Debate. Oxford University Press, pp. 140 ff. ISBN 9780190249380.  The author is an active priest in the Episcopal Church and practiced psychological counseling for thirty years. He views himself as straddling two worlds. His approach is based upon the view that "reductive physicalism" is neither compelling nor scientific. He hopes the latitude granted by abandoning reductive physicalism will admit a basis for understanding religious beliefs including such matters as gods, angels, and souls. Whether or not one subscribes to these goals, the discussion of the limitations of reductive physicalism is interesting.