In short, I agree with Wolterstorff that, while there is no theory in this extremely diverse array of biblical texts,…
Wolterstorff’s Bible-as-“frame”
Justice: Rights and Wrongs
We are all Christians now
At first glance, Justice is an internecine wrangle between theists (or better put, Christians). On the one side is Alasdair…
Look elsewhere for agonistic social ontology: A response to Smith
If it is indeed the case that "the social ontology of rights talk generally assumes that, at bottom, the kind…
Must secular rights fail?
It does certainly seem, as Simone Chambers points out in "Do good philosophers make good citizens?", that Dr. Wolterstorff ultimately…
“Bob and weave”: A response to Wolterstorff
Nicholas Wolterstorff's calm, careful, humble response to my posts might make me look like an overly pugilistic polemicist. But I…
Secular accounts: A response to Chambers
I want to re-emphasize the structure of my discussion about secular accounts of human rights. The project of trying to…
The fine texture: A response to Smith
I will respond here to the three postings on The Immanent Frame by James K. A. Smith concerning my Justice:…
Whig Calvinism?
I'll close my contribution to this symposium with some broad brush strokes by suggesting that Wolterstorff's project can be seen…
Do good philosophers make good citizens?
Perhaps one might argue that Justice: Rights and Wrongs is not simply a contribution to a conversation among philosophers. It…
Whose injustice? Which rights?
Wolterstorff (not unlike Jeff Stout) sometimes assumes that commitment to liberal democracy is the only way to care about justice;…