首页> 外文学位 >Korsgaard on Reason and The Normativity of Rationality.
【24h】

Korsgaard on Reason and The Normativity of Rationality.

机译:考斯加德关于理性与理性的规范性。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Korsgaard (2009) argues, against Kolodny (2005) and Broome (2007), that rational requirements are in fact normative. In her view the normativity of rational requirements is a function of their constitutive role in the deliberative activity of reason. After surveying the treatment of this question in the relevant literature, I explain Korsgaard's theory using pure constructivism as a framing device. I then argue that not only is her account of deliberative reason as an activity unsatisfactory (specifically, it fails to defeat the intuition that charges of boot-strapping are deeply problematic, and makes the adoption of reasons for belief from the deliberative perspective a function of an agent's commitment to principles and not of her seeing the belief as true), but that she is unable to account for the normativity of rationality (because her theory is unable to provide an answer that avoids regress or is not trivial to her own “normative question” when it takes a rational requirement as its object).
机译:Korsgaard(2009)反对Kolodny(2005)和Broome(2007)认为,理性要求实际上是规范性的。在她看来,理性要求的规范性是它们在理性的思考活动中的构成作用的函数。在调查了相关文献中对这个问题的处理方式之后,我解释了科尔斯加德的理论,其中使用了纯粹的建构主义作为框架。然后,我认为,不仅她对审议理性作为一项活动的描述不令人满意(特别是,它未能克服直觉,即引导的指控存在严重问题的直觉,并且使从审议角度采纳信仰原因具有一定的作用)。代理人对原则的承诺,而不是她对信念的正确理解),但是她无法解释理性的规范性(因为她的理论无法提供避免倒退或对她自己的“规范性”不重要的答案)问题”(以理性要求为对象)。

著录项

  • 作者

    English, Robert Colin.;

  • 作者单位

    The University of Mississippi.;

  • 授予单位 The University of Mississippi.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.
  • 学位 M.A.
  • 年度 2011
  • 页码 97 p.
  • 总页数 97
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号