Rejoinder to Hans Jonas

Abstract

My chapter has been correctly perceived by Hans Jonas, and by Richard Beauchamp and Ronald Green in oral criticism, to be more interpretive or descriptive than “positional.” One reason for this, though it may not be adequate, is that on a previous occasion in this group I offered a draft of a more “positional” paper and was sharply challenged to make clear its assumptions. My perception, perhaps an inaccurate one, was that it was necessary to interpret to this group what theological ethics is about prior to doing theological ethics. (Moral philosophers have for decades been telling us what ethics is about without being “positional” about morality. Maybe I have learned too well from them.) Perhaps I am too cautious, but theologians have good reasons to be cautious after several centuries of having theology charged with excessive certitude.