Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Tytuł pozycji:

Charakterystyka związku między zdaniami opisowymi a zdaniami normatywnymi.

Tytuł:
Charakterystyka związku między zdaniami opisowymi a zdaniami normatywnymi.
Characteristics of the Relationship between Descriptive Sentences and Normative Statements
Autorzy:
Andrzej Jastrzębski
Data publikacji:
2012
Tematy:
naturalistic fallacy
„is” and „ought”
descriptive sentences
normative sentences
Język:
polski
Dostawca treści:
CEJSH
Artykuł
  Przejdź do źródła  Link otwiera się w nowym oknie
he philosophical problem that is the focus of this article was polemically coined by David Hume and expressed in a Latin phrase: ab esse ad obligare non valet illatio. Thanks to George Moore, this statement entered into the history of philosophy as the naturalistic fallacy. Hume ques- tioned the possibility of deriving ethics from natural law. He was convinced that moral obligation has its roots rather in human emotions. Subsequently both Immanuel Kant in his categorical imper- ative, and Max Scheler in his material ethics of values, disputed Hume’s  statement. In the present article we will try to address the issue of the naturalistic fallacy, which denies the possibility of deriving an „ought” from an „is”, first of all in the field of formal logic. After- wards, we will analyze the relationship of descriptive and normative statements philosophically, psychologically and, in the end, neuroscientifically – all this in order to answer the question whether there is any possible link between those two types of statements.

The philosophical problem that is the focus of this article was polemically coined by David Hume and expressed in a Latin phrase: ab esse ad obligare non valet illatio. Thanks to George Moore, this statement entered into the history of philosophy as the naturalistic fallacy. Hume ques- tioned the possibility of deriving ethics from natural law. He was convinced that moral obligation has its roots rather in human emotions. Subsequently both Immanuel Kant in his categorical imper- ative, and Max Scheler in his material ethics of values, disputed Hume’s statement. In the present article we will try to address the issue of the naturalistic fallacy, which denies the possibility of deriving an „ought” from an „is”, first of all in the field of formal logic. After- wards, we will analyze the relationship of descriptive and normative statements philosophically, psychologically and, in the end, neuroscientifically – all this in order to answer the question whether there is any possible link between those two types of statements.

Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies