Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The article presents the ethics of care by Carol Gilligan in controversy with Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development. Gilligan discovered that women turned to be deficient in moral development when measured by Kohlberg's scale (usually on the third stage of his six stages). She rejected the scale as derived from the study of men. Her own studies suggest that autonomy and moral rights are not so important for women as care and responsibility for persons in relationships; moral problems arise from conflicting responsibilities rather than from competing rights and rules; women have different moral priorities; morality of rights and noninterference are frightening to women because presuppose indifference; women's ethics is not the ethics of justice but the ethics of care (three stages of moral development: care for myself, care for others, the balance between the care for myself and the care for others). Later research showed that the two moral orientations are not divided between biological sexes but rather cultural genders (cultural constructions of masculinity and femininity). The ethics of care has its own problems (the care for evil). The authoress claims that both perspectives converge and are next dilemma in ethics. Moral maturity must encompass both justice and care.
2
Content available remote

PRAGMATIST EPISTEMOLOGY BY MICHAEL WILLIAMS

100%
EN
The article presents three main elements of Williams' epistemology: the concept of knowledge, the problem of skepticism and the concept of truth. Williams takes knowledge not as pure descriptive but partly normative concept (to know is to be engaged and entitled). He rejects the demonstrative conception of knowledge (knowledge is infallible) and prefers the fallibilist conception of knowledge (knowledge is uncertain and fallible). Williams is good at bringing skeptical presuppositions to light: the demonstrative conception of knowledge and the conception of justification with Prior Grounding Requirement, epistemological realism and priority for internal knowledge. He rightly observes that when we change that presuppositions (skeptic's context), knowledge does exist. However, Williams-fallibilist is close to a skeptic: they both agree that our beliefs are uncertain. The difference is only whether some of our beliefs deserve to be called knowledge. The most important worries concern Williams' concept of truth (deflationary pragmatism). According to Williams truth has no nature and it is not a goal of inquiry. However, if truth is not a goal, we can hardly understand the previous discussion with skepticism and the defense of rationality.
EN
Self-consciousness is the source or set of information about our own present mental states. My self-knowledge is the set of all my information about myself, not only about my present mental states, but also my past mental states, my personality, my body or even my unconsciousness. Many philosophers thought that self-consciousness data are certain knowledge (Brentano, Husserl, Ingarden) but many contemporary philosophers claim that the first-person knowledge does not exist (Wittgenstein, Ryle, Dennett). Davidson refutes both behaviorism and subjectivity myth and takes some moderate position: first-person knowledge is dependent on third-person knowledge but third-person knowledge is dependent on first-person knowledge. There are some problems to reduce consciousness to physical states and to know about it. So, first-person knowledge is not certain and autonomous but it does exist and play important role. The two interdependent kinds of knowledge are two pillars of human knowledge. According to Davidson there is also some third pillar and it is the second-person knowledge.
4
Content available remote

ABSOLUTISM AND PLURALISM

100%
EN
Alethic absolutism is a thesis that propositions can not be more or less true, that they are true or false for ever (if true at all) and that their truth is independent on any circumstances of their assertion. In negative version, easier to defend, alethic absolutism claims the very same proposition can not be both true and false relative to circumstances of its assertion. Simple alethic pluralism is a thesis that we have many concepts of truth. It is a very good way to dissolve the controversy between alethic relativism and absolutism. Many philosophical concepts of truth are the best reason for such pluralism. If concept is meaning of a name, we have many concepts of truth because the name 'truth' was understood in many ways. The variety of meanings however can be superficial. Under it we can find one idea of truth expressed in correspondence truism or schema (T). The content of the truism is too poor to be content of anyone concept of truth, so it usually is connected with some picture of the world (ontology) and we have so many concepts of truth as many pictures of the world. The authoress proposes the hierarchical pluralism with privileged classic (or correspondence in weak sense) concept of truth as absolute property.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.