Sunday, 3 March 2013

Watson on Hart on Natural Law

Brandon Watson attempts to rebut David Bentley Hart's analysis of Natural Law Theory.

I have great respect for both parties and it is good to see substantive discussion.
Posted by at
Labels: , , ,

3 comments:

  1. Brandon3 March 2013 at 15:52

    Not so much a rebuttal as just perplexity. But you're definitely right that substantive discussion between Kantians (or people who have broadly rather than strictly Kantian views, which seems to be the case with Hart) and natural law theorists is a good thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. rmatrgu3 March 2013 at 16:21

      Wow.. my first comment... and by one of my blogging heroes!

      I've no idea how you managed to find my small blog in the vastness of the interWeb but thanks for taking time to comment.

      Thanks for the correction. Apologies for mischaracterising what you were doing. I have to say that I am a little perplexed too - partly because Hart's article seems to come from nowhere in terms of the other things I have read of his.

      I thought your Siris post was spot on and I was wondering if Ed Feser would write about it on his blog.

      I am an avid Siris fan by the way.

      Thanks for the comment.

      Delete
    2. Brandon3 March 2013 at 23:08

      'Rebut' is a good first approximation, just a little more definite than I feel I can really be.

      It showed up in StatCounter, so you have readers who are wandering over.

      Thanks for reading Siris!

      Delete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)