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

Refine search results

Journals help

  1. 2 Filozofia (Philosophy)

Authors help

  1. 1 Foltin M.

  2. 1 Turčan M.

Years help

  1. 1 2020

  2. 1 2019

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  SINGER PETER
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

ZDÔVODNENIE ĽUDSKÝCH PRÁV V KONCEPCII EFEKTÍVNEHO ALTRUIZMU

100%
Foltin M.
Filozofia (Philosophy)
|
2019
|
vol. 74
|
issue 8
622 – 636
EN
The paper deals with the normative reasoning of human rights in the concept of effective altruism. It focuses on the analysis of the works of Peter Singer and Thomas W. Pogge, who argue in favour of the moral obligation to protect human rights of people living in extreme poverty. The aim of the paper is to introduce the main principles of the universal and perfectionist-utilitarianist perspective of Peter Singer, the political understanding of protection of human rights by Thomas Pogge and the idealized ethical concept of effective altruism. In the article we say that normative philosophical reasoning is not sufficient to justify the protection of human rights. They are only one of many alternatives to their reasoning.
2

K NEGATÍVNEMU NAZERANIU M. ROTHBARDA NA MYŠLIENKU PRÁV ZVIERAT

100%
Turčan M.
Filozofia (Philosophy)
|
2020
|
vol. 75
|
issue 7
539 – 554
EN
The article deals with the approach of the right-wing libertarian, anarchy-capitalist, Murray Rothbard to the issue of animal rights. The author offers a critical analysis of his dismissal statements in the work Ethics of Liberty. He deals with Rothbard's arguments and confronts them with the arguments of Peter Singer and Gary Francione. The author pays special attention to Rothbardʼs argument from the nature of animal warfare, which is one of the reasons for Rothbardʼs view on animal rights. Based on a hypothetical example of beings from another world, which Rothbard himself mentions, the author refutes his argument and points to the problem of inconsistency in Rothbardʼs thinking. Given that this argument is not (and cannot be) a central argument for Rothbard, the author then focuses on Rothbardʼs central argument from the very notion of the concept of a right. The difference between Rothbard and Francione is, in this respect, conceptual (each of them works with a different understanding of the concept of a right). The difference between Rothbard and Singer is basically paradigmatic. In this context, the author points out that both anarchy-capitalism and utilitarianism are reductionist theories. He considers the need to find a non-reductionist solution. However, in the controversy, he leans to the side of Singer, due to the moral inadmissibility of Rothbardʼs assumption of the priority of individual freedom over relevance of any moral good or evil (under the respect of persons but not of other sentient beings), which cannot be understood other than Rothbardʼs ethical thesis.
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.