RESPONSE TO PAPERS FOR "ETHNOGRAPHY, ANTHROPOLOGY, AND COMPARATIVE RELIGIOUS ETHICS" FOCUS

The Center for the Study of World Religions (CSWR) project represented here through papers by Thomas Lewis, Aaron Stalnaker, Hans Lucht, and Lee Yearley (with responses) was motivated by the judgment that the trend toward a focus on virtue ethics, with attendant concern for techniques of forming sel...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Journal of religious ethics Vol. 38; no. 3; pp. 485 - 493
Main Author Kelsay, John
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Malden, USA Blackwell Publishing Inc 01.09.2010
Wiley Subscription Services
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Subjects
Anthropology
Aristotelean ethics
comparative ethics
Comparative religion
Cross cultural studies
Descriptive ethics
Ethics
Ethnography
Focus on Ethnography, Anthropology, and Comparative Religious Ethics
Lewis
Lucht
Mahmood
Moral judgment
Mothers
Muslims
Prasad
Religious ethics
Social ethics
Stalnaker
Virtue ethics
Yearley
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The Center for the Study of World Religions (CSWR) project represented here through papers by Thomas Lewis, Aaron Stalnaker, Hans Lucht, and Lee Yearley (with responses) was motivated by the judgment that the trend toward a focus on virtue ethics, with attendant concern for techniques of forming selves, creates an opportunity for a dialogue with ethnographers. I argue that the CSWR essays neglect social and institutional considerations, as well as overdrawing the distinction between "formalist" and virtue approaches to the study of comparative ethics.
Bibliography:ArticleID:JORE442
istex:F9C2255AE5072597635A4287EFD4425DCDDA01D3
ark:/67375/WNG-V4X81CSC-K
ISSN:0384-9694
1467-9795
DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9795.2010.00442.x