首页> 外文OA文献 >Two Views of Conscience for the Australian People
【2h】

Two Views of Conscience for the Australian People

机译:对澳大利亚人民的两种良心观

摘要

Australian democracy has recently seen a new emphasis on ‘conscience votes’ in parliament. However, despite this increasing awareness, the Australian media, public and governments have failed to examine closely the concept of a ‘conscience vote’, and the important question of what conscience really is. I will examine a number of statements made by politicians, media commentators and other groups surrounding conscience votes to show the problems that emerge from lacking a clear account of conscience. From this, I will outline two different classical views of conscience: that of Bishop Joseph Butler and that of St. Thomas Aquinas, and show the implications for politicians of adopting either view. I will suggest that the contemporary Australian usage of conscience has more in common with Butler than Aquinas, but that the Thomistic view could serve to better inform both the contemporary Australian usage, and Butler’s views. I will briefly suggest some ways that adopting the Thomistic view of conscience would impact on the Australian democratic system, and explain the problems with a philosophical view that upholds the primacy of conscience and fails to appeal to external moral truth.
机译:澳大利亚民主最近在议会中重新重视“良心投票”。然而,尽管人们的意识有所提高,但澳大利亚媒体,公众和政府仍未能仔细研究“良心投票”的概念以及良心到底是什么的重要问题。我将研究政客,媒体评论员和其他围绕良心投票的团体所作的许多发言,以表明由于缺乏明确的良心解释而出现的问题。由此,我将概述两种不同的良知古典观点:约瑟夫·巴特勒主教和圣托马斯·阿奎那主教,并说明采用两种观点对政治家的影响。我将建议,当代澳大利亚人对良心的使用与巴特勒比阿奎那有更多共同点,但托马斯主义的观点可以更好地为当代澳大利亚人使用和巴特勒的观点提供信息。我将简要提出一些采用托马斯主义良心观会影响澳大利亚民主制度的方式,并以一种秉持良心至上而未能诉诸外部道德真理的哲学观点来解释这些问题。

著录项

  • 作者

    Beard Matthew;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2011
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

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