We will readily modify notes if there are any inaccuracies.

None the less he does belong inthe libertarian tradition from which these later movements would evolve,a tradition which, curiously enough is sometimes seen as originating fromGerald Winstanley who also allegedly replaces the concept of a transcendentGod with that of immanent reason (see Woodcock's Anarchism).

Certainly ranking the relative historical influence of individuals is a subjective process.

A line therefore must be drawn between goods for others that will only concern us through contractual actions rebounding to our self-interest, and those goods for others that may make demands on us to act out of moral duty for the sake of those others even without expectation of benefit to ourselves.


Thomas Mann) and on people in general than on academic philosophy.

The second was the religion or philosophy the person later joined or founded.

Respecting the autonomy of others is a simpler, more definite, and more defensible principle than whatever it would mean to respect oneself, as well as another, as an end in itself.


Adolf Hitler never boasted of Auschwitz.

Someone could be Confessed and absolved of sin on the spot, and receive Communion, but then be obliged to carry out what might only be, for minor sins, a nominal form of penance.

Many of these Christians are on Hart's list.

Later, with routine baptisms at earlier ages, even infancy, damnation from subsequent sin became a worry, and the idea grew that penance, even when practiced by others on one's behalf, could erase sin and open the way to Heaven.

All of the creation wouldn't exist if it were not for Jesus Christ.

This mirrored the situation in the hereafter, where those saved by Faith and Repentance were assured of salvation, but might need to undergo the purifications of .

What stands over and above objects is something else.

This sharply separated the moral issue, which was forgiveness, from the religious issues of salvation, which is assured for the believer, and pollution, which must be purified.

For Berkeley that was only God.

This is consistent neither with the worries of the early Church, where sin was damning, nor with respect for the gravity of crime, which seems to be trivialized by the teaching.

For Schopenhauer it was the Will as thing-in-itself.

We certainly cannot expect any understanding of the metaphysics or epistemology of religious judgment if we are lacking even such understanding for morality.