uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
Refine search result
12 1 - 50 of 89
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Brodd, Sven-Erik
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Humanistisk-samhällsvetenskapliga vetenskapsområdet, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Humanistisk-samhällsvetenskapliga vetenskapsområdet, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Teologen borde stärkas: Svar på debattartikel av Lennart Philipson: Avskaffa prästutbildningen vid universiteten2006In: Upsala Nya Tidning, no 2 oktoberArticle in journal (Other (popular scientific, debate etc.))
  • 2.
    Bäckström, Anders
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Thorleif Pettersson in memoriam2010Other (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
    Abstract [sv]

    Minnesord över professor Thorleif Pettersson den 21 maj 2010 i Upsala Nya Tidning.

  • 3.
    Franck, Olof
    et al.
    Göteborgs universitet.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Att undervisa om religion och vetenskap: Med grund i ämnesplanen för religionskunskap2012Book (Other academic)
  • 4.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    A Counter-response on "A Religiously Partisan Science"2005In: Theology and Science, Vol. 3, no 1, p. 92-95Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    A counter-response to Medhi Golshani's comment on my article "A Religiously Partisan Science? Islamic and Christian Perspectives".

  • 5.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Humanistisk-samhällsvetenskapliga vetenskapsområdet, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    A Religiously Partisan Science?: Islamic and Christian Perspectives2005In: Theology and Science, Vol. 3, no 1, p. 23-38Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Abstract Both within Christianity and Islam we can find influential scholars who maintain that science is not religiously neutral because it contains a naturalist bias. They argue that Christians or Muslims should respond by developing their own kind of science, an “Islamic science,” a “sacred science,” a “theistic science” or a “faith-informed science.” In this paper the recent writings of two advocates of such a view, standing in two different religious traditions, namely Mehdi Golshani (Islam) and Alvin Plantinga (Christianity) are compared, analyzed and evaluated. A distinction between different ways in which religion might enter into the fabric of science is introduced and it is argued that the most crucial issues surround the question of whether or not religion ought to play a part in the validation of theories.

  • 6.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    An Unfinished Debate: What Are the Aims of Science and Religion?1997In: Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science, Vol. 32, no 4, p. 491-514Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    I discuss the kinds of fundamental questions that must be addressed by people who develop theories about how religion and science are (or should be) related. After categorizing these questions as axiological, epistemological, ontological, or semantical,

  • 7.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Att välja religiös tro i ett pluralistiskt samhälle: en filosofisk reflexion2002Book (Other academic)
  • 8.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Behovet av nya gudsbilder: En kritisk granskning av Sally McFagues metaforiska teologi1997In: Svensk teologisk kvartalskrift, ISSN 0039-6761, Vol. 73, no 4, p. 112-125Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper I analyse Sallie McFague's book "Models of God". The focus is especially on two issues. The first concerns whether language in general or religious language in particular are irreducibly metaphorical. The second concerns whether a traditiona

  • 9.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology, Studies in Faith and Ideologies, Philosophy of Religion.
    Competing conceptions of God: The personal God versus the God beyond being2015In: Religious studies (Print), ISSN 0034-4125, E-ISSN 1469-901X, Vol. 51, no 2, p. 205-220Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Among philosophers and theologians today, one of the most important dividing lines is the one separating those who advocate a personal conception of God (personal theism) from those who embrace the idea of a God beyond or without being (alterity theism). There is not much dialogue between these groups of scholars; rather the two groups ignore each other, and each party typically believes that there is a fairly straightforward knockdown argument against the other. In this article I explore these two standard objections – the idolatry objection and the no-sense objection – and show why they both fail to be convincing. This failure to convince is a good thing, because it opens up the possibility that both personal theism and alterity theism are legitimate research programmes, each worthy of being further developed in philosophical theology.

  • 10.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Contemporary Darwinism and Religion2004In: Darwinian Heresies / [ed] Abigail Lustig, Robert Richards, Michael Ruse, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press , 2004, p. 173-191Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The relationship between Darwin’s theory of evolution and religion has been, to say the least, a controversial topic ever since the publication of The Origin of Species in 1859. Interestingly enough, evolutionary biologists have had and continue to have quite different views about this relationship. The questions that I addess in this essay are: (1) what views about the proper relationship between science and religion can we find among contemporary evolutionary biologists? and (2) how should we assess these views?--more specifically, which one (if any) is the most reasonable one to adopt? In relation to these issues I also ask (3) what would count as Darwinian heresy on this matter?

  • 11.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Contextualism2003In: Encyclopedia of Science and Religion, Vol. 1, p. 165-166Article in journal (Other academic)
  • 12.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Environmental Ethics and Policy-Making2002Book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The key concern of the book is whether differences in ethical theory have any relevance for the practical issue of environmental management and policy-making. I develop this theme, first, by asking what kind of values current environmental policy-making i

  • 13.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Environmental Ethics and Sustainable Development1997In: Foundations of sustainable development, p. 5-20Article in journal (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Efter det att en kort presentation av miljöetik getts, diskuteras vilka värderingar som föreställningen om en hållbar utveckling bygger på. Grundtanken är den att vi ska bevara naturen för vår egen och kommande människogenerationernas skull. Denna starkt

  • 14.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology, Studies in Faith and Ideologies, Philosophy of Religion.
    Ethics, Sustainable Development and the Millennium Declaration2007In: Sustainable development and global ethics, Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis , 2007Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 15.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Evolution, Purpose and God2001In: Ars Disputandi: The Online Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Vol. 1Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    A number of biologists maintain that the recent developments in evolutionary biology have profound implications for religion, morality and our self-understanding. The author focuses on the issue whether evolutionary biology has any relevance for a religio

  • 16.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology. religionsfilosofi.
    Exclusivism, tolerance and interreligious dialogue2006In: Studies in Interreligious Dialogue, Vol. 16, no 1, p. 100-114Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The exclusivist stance towards other religions (or worldviews) endorsed by many religious activists is one of the main factors which cause the religious violence and conflicts we can see in the world today. The strategy adopted by many scholars of religion is therefore to argue against exclusivism as a rational position to adopt. In this article I propose a different and hopefully more effective strategy. The basic idea is that we as scholars of religion should analyze what resources there are within exclusivism itself to deal with religious violence, to support tolerance and even to learn something from the religious other. If such resources exist, there is then a greater chance of persuading religious leaders within the exclusivist camp to adopt more peaceful and non-confrontational views than there is of transforming them into inclusivists or pluralists.

  • 17.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Fallibilism2003In: Encyclopedia of Science and Religion, Thomson & Gale , 2003, Vol. 1, p. 322-323Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 18.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Falsifiability2003In: Encyclopedia of Science and Religion, Vol. 1, p. 323-Article in journal (Other academic)
  • 19.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Gud, Darwin och människan2011In: Människan sedd: genom olika vetenskapliga prismor / [ed] Hammarström, Matz, Elisabeth Gerle, Peter Gärdenfors, Nora: Nya Doxa , 2011, p. 37-53Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 20.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Gud, evolution och ateism2009In: Svensk teologisk kvartalskrift, ISSN 0039-6761, Vol. 85, no 4, p. 171-181Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 21.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Guds relevans för livets mening1995In: Svensk Teologisk Kvartalsskrift, Vol. 71, no 1Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The question considered is whether the existence of God is of relevance for the meaning of life. Some possible answers to this question is discussed. First, the view is considered that human life is meaningless if God does not exist because without God th

  • 22.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Gudstro och förnuft i dagens pluralistiska samhälle2012In: Svensk teologisk kvartalskrift, ISSN 0039-6761, Vol. 88, no 2, p. 58-67Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 23.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Gudstron i ett sekulariserat samhälle - om religionens rationalitet2001In: Filosofisk Tidskrift, Vol. 22, no 3, p. 19-33Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 24.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Holmes Rolston, III, Genes, Genesis and God (Cambridge University Press, 1999)2001In: Religious Studies, Vol. 37, p. 230-233Article, book review (Other academic)
  • 25.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University.
    How should one do religious epistemology?2000In: Perspectives on contemporary philosophy of religion, Luther-Agricola-Seura, Helsinki , 2000, p. 136-151Chapter in book (Other scientific)
    Abstract [en]

    The topic of this conference is the question what contemporary philosophy of religion is and what it could, and should, be in the future. I will approach this subject by focusing on one particular area of philosophy of religion, namely religious epistemology or, if you prefer, the epistemology of religion. What I want to bring to your attention, perhaps a bit surprisingly, is the discussion about epistemology and rationality that is prevalent in contemporary theology. What is interesting and worth reflecting on is that many contemporary theologians do what we call religious epistemology in a way that is significantly different from the way it is typically done by philosophers of religion (at least of the analytic tradition). The purpose here is to consider some of these contemporary theologians and to assess critically how they argue and whether this is a good way of doing religious epistemology.

  • 26.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    How to Relate Christian Faith and Science2012In: Blackwell Companion to Science and Christianity / [ed] Jim Stump, Alan Padgett, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012, p. 63-73Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 27.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Humanistisk-samhällsvetenskapliga vetenskapsområdet, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    How to Relate Science and Religion: A Multidimensional Model2004Book (Other scientific)
  • 28.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    How to Relate Theology and Science Today: Challenges and opportunities2012In: Estudio Agustiniano, ISSN 0425-340X, Vol. 47, no 1, p. 37-56Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 29.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    In Science (Alone) We Trust?2010In: The Human project in Science and Religion: Copenhagen University Discussions in Science and Religion Vol. 1 / [ed] Runehov, L. C. Anne, Niels Henrik Gregersen, Jacob Wolf, Copenhagen: The Copenhagen University Network of Science and Religion , 2010, p. 53-73Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 30.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Is there a Human Nature?2012In: Zygon, ISSN 0591-2385, E-ISSN 1467-9744, Vol. 47, no 4, p. 890-902Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Both evolutionary theory and Christian faith have a number of things to say about human beings. Evolutionists claim that humans are animals with a bipedal walk, an erect posture, and a large brain, while Christians maintain that, like everything else, human beings are created by God, but that, in contrast to other things on earth, we humans are also created in the image of God. This much is clear, but do either evolutionists or Christians also claim that there is such a thing as a human nature? Or, even if evolutionary theory and Christian faith do not say so explicitly, should we nevertheless assume that they embrace such a view implicitly? In this essay, I argue that we should give an affirmative answer to these questions. I also try to clarify more precisely what it means to say that something has a nature (i.e., what conditions need to be satisfied for something to be regarded as having a nature).

  • 31.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Kan religiös tro vara rationell?2012In: Att undervisa om religion och vetenskap: med grund i ämnesplanen för religionskunskap / [ed] Olof Franck och Mikael Stenmark, Lund: Studentlitteratur, 2012, p. 97-112Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 32.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Miljöetik - om miljöproblematikens tredje dimension2003In: Vägar till kunskap, Symposion, Stockholm , 2003, p. 214-236Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 33.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Miljöetik och miljövård2000Book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The key concern of the book is whether differences in ethical theory have any relevance for the practical issue of environmental management and policy-making. I develop this theme, first, by asking what kind of values current environmental policy-making

  • 34.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Humanistisk-samhällsvetenskapliga vetenskapsområdet, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Models of Science and Religion: Is there any Alternative to Ian Barbour's Typology?2005In: Studies in Science and Theology: Streams of Wisdom? Science, Theology and Cultural Dynamics, Lund University , 2005, p. 105-119Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    An important issue in the science-religion discussion is how to characterize the main possible ways of relating science and religion. Due to the influence of Ian Barbour’s important work in the science-religion field, the standard way of presenting the relationship between science and religion is in terms of four views or models (conflict, independence, dialogue and integration). In this paper I point out some problems with his typology and suggest instead an alternative three-dimensional typology.

  • 35.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Nachhaltige Entwicklung und Umweltethik2003In: Natur und Kultur, Vol. 4, no 1, p. 3-33Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In the article the values and ethical principles that decision-makers often presuppose in their environmental policy-making are explored. Examining the content of the “ethic of sustainable development” that the UN and the world’s governments want us to e

  • 36.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Naturvetenskap och religion2011In: Religionsdidaktik: mångfald, livsfrågor och etik i skolan / [ed] Malin Löfstedt, Lund: Studentlitteratur, 2011, p. 79-95Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 37.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Om ateism och gudstro: är det verkligen rationellt att vara ateist?2011In: Signum, ISSN 0347-0423, Vol. 37, no 5, p. 12-18Article in journal (Other academic)
  • 38.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Om evolution, livets mening och slump2003In: Den dolde artisen: Om darwinism, skapelsetro, mening och slump, Norma bokförlag , 2003, p. 133-155Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 39.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Philosophical Theology and Rational Theology2012In: Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif, ISSN 2226-2385, Vol. 53, no Suppl.3, p. 138-147Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    VincentBrümmer’s philosophical theology project has been of utmost importance for philosophersof religion, and will continue to be so for the next generation of such scholars. In this essay I defend his position against the objections to philosophical theology raised by Eberhard Herrmann. But I further argue that philosophers of religion must go beyond philosophical theology and also engage in rational theology. Once we have established the meaning and coherence of certain religious beliefs andtheir connection to other religious beliefs, philosophers should go on to ask whether it is rational to accept these beliefs in the first place; and, if not, should consider what religious people might believe instead. Whereas philosophical theology attempts to test the coherence of doctrinal claims, their implications and their connection to other doctrinal claims, rational theology attempts to test the rationality and warrant of these doctrinal claims and to explore their connection to philosophical, scientific, political and moral claims.

  • 40.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Postmodern teologi, kunskap och sanning2013In: Svensk teologisk kvartalskrift, ISSN 0039-6761, Vol. 89, no 4, p. 139-150Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    A number of contemporary Swedish and international theologians maintain that postmodernism has created a much more benign climate for theology. The conditions of doing theology has indeed changed to such an extent that we are justified in talking about a paradigm shift in theology. In this essay I evaluate some of the epistemological changes that are taken to be part of this paradigm shift in theology. To be able do this I develop what I call an “upgraded everyday life epistemology” and try to identify the differences between it and this new epistemology. I then explain why I think we should accept some of the elements of postmodern epistemology but reject others. Most of all I argue that postmodern views about truth, reason, knowledge, and rationality lack sufficient precision to be objects for a properly evaluated.

  • 41.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Humanistisk-samhällsvetenskapliga vetenskapsområdet, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Racionalidade e Compromisso Religioso1999In: Numen: Revista de estudos e pesquisa da religiao, ISSN 1516-1021, Vol. 2, no 2, p. 11-27Article in journal (Other scientific)
  • 42.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Humanistisk-samhällsvetenskapliga vetenskapsområdet, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Rationality and different conceptions of science2006In: The evolution of rationality, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids , 2006, p. 47-72Chapter in book (Other scientific)
    Abstract [en]

    An important question concerns the role which values, ideology or religion should play in contemporary science. In recent years an influential group of scholars have argued against the received view of science: the idea of an autonomous, value-free and ideologically neutral science. They have instead maintained that we need a new conception of science in which science and values are explicitly linked. We need a science that is infused with, or guided by values, ideology or religion. In this essay an attempt is made to explicate and critically compare these different conceptions of science.

  • 43.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Rationality and religious commitment1999In: Studia Theologica. Scandinavian Journal of Theology, Vol. 53, no 2, p. 1-13Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    One of the most forceful challenges that has been raised against religious belief consists of the claim that even if there is sufficient evidence, or if evidence is not necessary, to rationally justify the acceptance of religious beliefs, these beliefs ou

  • 44.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Rationality in Science, Religion and Everyday Life. A Critical Evaluation of Four Models of Rationality1995Book (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The book deals with questions of rationality. Four different models for understanding the concept of rationality are distinguished (formal evidentialism, social evidentialism, presumptionism and contextualism), and it is discussed what consequences each m

  • 45.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Rec av Anthony O’Hear, Beyond Evolution: Human Nature and the Limitation of Evolutionary Explanation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 19971999In: Religious Studies, Vol. 35, p. 501-502Article, book review (Other academic)
  • 46.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology, Studies in Faith and Ideologies, Philosophy of Religion.
    Relativism - Pervasive Feature of the Contemporary Western World?2015In: Social Epistemology, ISSN 0269-1728, E-ISSN 1464-5297, Vol. 29, no 1, p. 31-43Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    What is relativism? Why should we (or should we not) adopt a relativistic stance towards what we and others hold to be true about the world? And how did relativism come to be such a pervasive feature of the contemporary Western world? These are questions which I address in this paper. To relativize is to maintain that what is true-and not merely what is taken to be true-is dependent upon (is relative to) group, community, society, culture and the like and is not simply true in a universal way; that is, the same everywhere and for everyone. This is the Relativist Thesis. This thesis, in combination with some of the other theses concerning relativism, in particular the Expansionist Thesis-the idea that the scope of what is relative is significantly greater than what has previously been thought-makes the refutation of relativism much harder than philosophers in general have commonly assumed.

  • 47.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Relativism and Uncertainty: A Response to Lukes and Riggio2014In: Social Epistemology, ISSN 0269-1728, E-ISSN 1464-5297, Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, Vol. 3, no 7, p. 10-15Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    A  new epistemology − or a mindset through which to see truth and knowledge in a particular light − has emerged and is increasingly shaping the worldview of people in the West. (And perhaps we should not, as Steven Lukes suggests, limit it to the West.) A fundamental shift in epistemology is taking place in today’s society. An appropriate name for this new folk epistemology is disputed, as is its content and, of course, the question of whether or not it is a desirable development. 

    In “Relativism — a Pervasive Feature of the Contemporary Western World,” I named it relativism and argued that what is new is not strictly speaking its content, but rather is the extension of the viewpoint: more and more people nowadays think that the scope of what is relative is significantly greaterthan what had previously been commonly thought. There is a growing suspicion that, when it comes to morality, religion, knowledge, truth and science, what we had earlier thought to be fixed and universal is actually malleable and local, and is dependent on human interest, gender, class, ethnicity, culture, or worldview. Steven Lukes and Adam Riggio seem to agree, and also to find my conception of relativism illuminating and useful, but they raise some interesting and challenging questions to which I shall try to respond.

  • 48.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology, Studies in Faith and Ideologies, Philosophy of Religion.
    Religion and Science2007In: The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Religion, London: Routledge , 2007, p. 692-701Chapter in book (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 49.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Religion kontra vetenskap - en olöslig konflikt?1999In: Signum, Vol. 25, no 3, p. 22-27Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this article I discuss one aspect of the issue of how one as a Christian theologian or philosopher should relate one's Christian beliefs to everything else one knows or believes. (What I call the problem of integration.) The question I focus on concern

  • 50.
    Stenmark, Mikael
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Theology, Department of Theology.
    Religion och vetenskap i olika perspektiv1999In: Signum, Vol. 25, no 6, p. 62-64Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The article is a response to the criticism that Catharina Broomé raised against some of my claims in ”Religion kontra vetenskap – en olöslig konflikt?” (Signum 3/1999). I artikeln bemöts den kritik som Catharina Broomé riktat mot min artikel ”Religion k

12 1 - 50 of 89
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf