This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Groothuis, D. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

On Not Abolishing Faith Schools

A Response to Michael Hand and H. Siegel

Denver Seminary, USA, Douglas.Groothuis{at}denverseminary.edu

This article finds Michael’s Hand’s argument for the abolition of faith schools to be deficient because key premises of his argument seem false. I argue that the concept of knowledge that Hand employs in arguing that no religious proposition is known to be true is overly strict. I reject Siegel’s attempt to amend Hand’s argument to make it stronger because Siegel employs a false construal of ‘faith’. I further argue that Hand’s premise that students in faith schools will not take their teachers to be religious authorities is very weak. Finally, I note that the abolishing of faith schools does not follow from either Hand’s or Siegel’s argument.

Key Words: education • epistemology • faith • knowledge • religion

Theory and Research in Education, Vol. 2, No. 2, 177-188 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1477878504043443


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Hand The problem with faith schools: A reply to my critics Theory and Research in Education, November 1, 2004; 2(3): 343 - 353. [Abstract] [PDF]