We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.
To save this undefined to your undefined account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your undefined account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Many philosophers, including perhaps most famously G.E. Moore, have argued that morality is non-natural. Here, Paul Kurtz defends the view that it is, in fact, natural and can in fact be justified empirically.
Recent events in the Middle East once again focused attention on the Israel/Palestine issue. In the following article, adapted from his recent book, Ted Honderich controversially defends the Palestinians' moral right to engage in terrorism.
The question of the existence (or otherwise) of ‘absolute truths’ has been debated for thousands of years. The position that there are no such truths — relativism — comes in several varieties. In this, the first of two consecutive articles by Alchin, we hear a debate on the most common form of relativism: moral relativism.
We can contrast moral relativism, which was discussed in the previous article, with cognitive relativism, which holds that there are no universal truths about the world at all; that the world has no universal characteristics and that there are only different ways of interpreting it. Cognitive relativism is the subject of this article.
Stephen Law has recently argued (Think 9), using a dialogue set on the fictional planet Eth, that traditional belief in God is ‘silly’. Bergmann and Brower argue that theists on Earth should not be convinced.
In a recent issue of Think, Brenda Watson suggested that atheism is also a ‘faith position’. Here, Piers Benn looks more closely at this often-made suggestion.
The ‘Problem of Evil’ has been the focus of a number of articles in Think. Here, Timothy Chambers offers an unusual perspective on this seemingly intractable difficulty facing theists.
‘Did not I weep for him whose day was hard? Was not my soul grieved for the poor? But when I looked for good, evil came; and when I waited for light, darkness came.’
John Stuart Mill was born two hundred years ago, on 20th May, 1806. He died on 7th May 1873. Peter Cave brings to life some of the thinking of this outstanding philosopher.
In issue 12 of Think, Rodney Holder developed a version of the fine-tuning argument for the existence of God, claiming that certain features of our universe make the probability that God exists high. Here, Dene Bebbington responds.
We are often warned against stepping onto ‘slippery slopes’ — dangerously slick slides leading down to where the really bad stuff lies. But, as Arthur Miller here explains, these warnings often exaggerate the risk of a slip.