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

Search:
in the keywords:  moral realism
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Sovereignty and Autonomy of the Moral Subject

100%
Baran k. d. M.
Horyzonty Polityki
|
2019
|
vol. 10
|
issue 30
EN
Research objective: The following article aims at clarifying the relation between the notion of autonomy of the moral subject and its sovereignty. The research problem and methodology: The notions of sovereignty and autonomy attributed to the moral subject seem to be used as synonyms. Yet in the political theory the two terms seem to have slightly different meaning. Is it justified to use these notions related to the moral subject as synonyms or should they rather be distinguished? Using the descriptive-analytic and comparative method the author examines the chosen sources considered as most important reference points for the matter. The process of argumentation: The article begins with the presentation of the conception of autonomy formulated by I. Kant as the most influential for the whole modernity. This conception can have a “moral realist” and “creative anti-realist” interpretation. Afterwards it presents the contemporary interpretation of autonomy by Kristine M. Korsgaard representing the “creative anti-realist” view. This creative anti-realist interpretation is confronted with its two critiques by John E. Hare and Charles Larmore. Research results: The result of the discussion in the article is the proposition to name the modern radical creative anti-realist interpretation of autonomy the sovereignty of the moral subject and thus distinguish between the notion of sovereignty and autonomy. Conclusions, innovations and recommendations: This view of autonomy is connected with the naturalistic world view which by many modern philosophers is accepted without further questioning, whereas it is not the only possible position. We should keep questioning the so called “metaphysics of the modern world” and formulate an alternative which gives a more adequate place to the moral reasons in the world.
2
Content available remote

Norms and facts

72%
Sobek T.
The Lawyer Quarterly
|
2017
|
vol. 7
|
issue 3
180-199
EN
In this paper, I am going to deal with a logical relation between facts and norms. Humans both cognize some facts and take value attitudes to them. But what is a logical relation between these two activities of human thinking? I will focus on what it is for a fact to ground a norm. The normative beliefs that we ground on some facts ultimately always presuppose the acceptance of some normative principles that are no longer dependent on any facts. A full-blooded normativity is coming alive only from the position of participants in legal practice, and thus from within the practice. Ultimately, legal validity is not based on knowledge of a fact, whether normative or empirical. It is based on a practical stance of the acceptance of legal authority. Such an attitude is implicit in the day-to-day practice of human agents who use law without the need to thematise its normative grounds.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

FILOZOFICZNE ŹRÓDŁA ANTYREALIZMU ETYCZNEGO

58%
Saja K.
Roczniki Filozoficzne
|
2014
|
vol. 62
|
issue 1
5-24
EN
In the contemporary analytic philosophy about one-third of authors tend toward moral anti-realism. Sources of its popularity have to be found in many arguments justifying the abandonment of moral realism. Every realist should meet them. Unfortunately, in Polish literature about ethics it is difficult to find a presentation and a critique of these arguments. Many philosophers who represent continental philosophy like Neo-Thomism, material Value-Ethics, hermeneutic ethics, assume ethical realism and do not respond to the arguments of anti-realists. The purpose of the article is to present in one place the most important arguments that are important sources of ethical anti-realism in metaethics of analytic philosophy.
PL
We współczesnej filozofii analitycznej około jednej trzeciej autorów skłania się ku antyrealizmowi etycznemu. Źródeł tej popularności szukać należy w wielu argumentach, które uzasadniają porzucenie realizmu. Każdy realista etyczny powinien się z nimi zmierzyć. Niestety, w polskim piśmiennictwie poświęconym etyce trudno jest znaleźć prezentację oraz krytykę przedstawionych w artykule argumentów. Wielu przedstawicieli np. klasycznej etyki tomistycznej, niemieckiej etyki wartości, hermeneutycznej etyki odpowiedzialności lub innych nurtów filozofii, zakładając etyczny realizm, nie udziela odpowiedzi na zarzuty antyrealistów. Celem artykułu jest zaprezentowanie stanowiska oraz najważniejszych argumentów, które są istotnym źródłem etycznego antyrealizmu w metaetyce filozofii analitycznej.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Does Multiculturalism Need a Relativistic Basis?

58%
Gueye C. M.
Kultura i Polityka
|
2013
|
issue 13
11-26
EN
The fact of multiculturalism, i.e., the cohabitation of diverse cultural groups or communities, is a distinctive mark of the twenty-first century. In the face of this fact, various theories have been developed. Multiculturalism is one of them. Multiculturalism is an answer to the fact of multiculturalism. Claiming to rest on the respect for diversity, the right of difference, the protection of freedom, and the search for peaceful cohabitation, multiculturalism has often been promoted with the use of highly relativistic arguments and principles. The present paper, however, aims at criticising this understanding of multiculturalism as a mere (laissez - faire) celebration of differences, by arguing that true multiculturalism needs not be relativistic, but ought to be articulated mainly with regard to the universal demands of the human person. Such a theory replaces “blind tolerance” with a “measured and firm sense of responsibility”, and “inauthentic recognition of cultural equal worth” with a “qualitative assessment of cultures.” It is a theory that has as its underpinning criterion to assess cultural differences their compatibility with justice, human dignity and human rights.
PL
Wielokulturowość, czyli współistnienie różnych grup kulturowych oraz wspólnot, to znak rozpoznawczy XXI wieku. Istnienie tego zjawiska doprowadziło do powstania wielu teorii. Jedną z nich jest multikulturalizm, będący odpowiedzią na fakt istnienia wielokulturowości. Przyjmując, iż doktryna ta polega na poszanowaniu różnic, prawie do odmienności, ochronie wolności i dążeniu do pokojowego współistnienia, często propaguje się ją przy użyciu mocno relatywistycznych argumentów i zasad. Niniejsza praca ma na celu krytykę rozumienia multikulturalizmu wyłącznie jako celebrowania różnic. Multikulturalizm nie musi być relatywistyczny i powinien być omawiany głównie w odniesieniu do uniwersalnych potrzeb człowieka. Teoria ta zastępuje „ślepą tolerancję” – „przemyślanym i stanowczym poczuciem odpowiedzialności”, a „nieautentyczne uznanie jednakowych wartości różnych kultur” – “jakościową oceną kultur”. Podstawą multikulturalizmu jest ocenianie różnic kulturowych na podstawie ich zgodności ze sprawiedliwością, godnością ludzką i prawami człowieka.
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.