The Arkes-Miller debate

Sébastien_Norblin_Antigone_et_Polynice (1)

A very interesting debate has appeared at Public Discourse following the publication of Hadley Arkes’s essay, Recasting Religious Freedom (subscription required) in the June issue of First Things, between Arkes and Robert T. Miller. The central issue involves a dispute over the best defense of religious freedom in an age shadowed by secularism. Arkes believes the best defense here, given the modern tendency to assume the beliefs of religionists are intrinsically irrational,  rests upon a positive account of the reasonableness of the views held by religionists (or non-religionists) rather than upon the sincerity with which they are held. Miller, however, argues that the views of religionists are a special case, and that we should avoid the requirement of judges inquiring into their reasonableness unless absolutely necessary.

The order of the debate is as follows:

Professor Arkes and the Law

Judging Beliefs and Shaping Laws: A Reply to Robert Miller

What Reason can Know and Government Should Legislate: A Rejoinder to Arkes

I will provide an update if Arkes responds to the rejoinder.


One thought on “The Arkes-Miller debate”

  1. interesting. and very useful to read.
    I see religion as where someone has to do something to appease God. Christianity is therefore not a religion.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s