检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:陈子衿 CHEN Zijin
出 处:《湖南师范大学社会科学学报》2024年第5期26-31,共6页Journal of Social Science of Hunan Normal University
摘 要:在元伦理学领域中,围绕什么是具有优先地位的规范性概念,哲学家们形成了许多讨论。其中,“理由优先论”与“适合性优先论”是两种较有潜力的进路。一些人试图通过“恶魔论证”的情境,表明我们更应该接受适合性优先论。然而,在对理由概念进行深入分析后,我们会发现,“恶魔论证”并不能打败理由优先论。适合性优先论虽然在一些方面取得了成功,但该理论可能并不如其支持者所声称的那样,可以完美地替代理由优先论。In the field of metaethics,philosophers have engaged in numerous discussions regarding what constitutes a normative concept with priority.Among them,“reason-first theory”and“fittingness-first theory”are two promising approaches.Some individuals attempt to argue for the acceptance of fittingness-first theory through the scenario of the“devil s advocate”.However,upon conducting a thorough analysis of the concept of reason,we will find that the devil s advocate argument fails to defeat reason-first theory.Fittingness-first theory has achieved success in certain aspects,but it may not be able to perfectly replace reason-first theory as claimed by its proponents.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.171