Notice: تابع WP_Block_Type_Registry::register به طورنادرست فراخوانی شد. نامهای نوع بلوک نباید حروف بزرگ داشته باشند. لطفاً برای اطلاعات بیشتر، اشکال زدایی در وردپرس را مشاهده کنید. (این پیام در نگارش 5.0.0 افزوده شده است.) in /home/ethicsho/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5313
Warning: Use of undefined constant TDC_PATH_LEGACY - assumed 'TDC_PATH_LEGACY' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/ethicsho/public_html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/td-composer.php on line 109
Warning: Use of undefined constant TDSP_THEME_PATH - assumed 'TDSP_THEME_PATH' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/ethicsho/public_html/wp-content/plugins/td-composer/td-composer.php on line 113 بایگانیهای BJ1188 .B57 2005 - خانه اخلاق پژوهان جوان Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /home/ethicsho/public_html/wp-content/plugins/wp-ulike/inc/general-functions.php on line 807
The Shorter REPpresents the very best of the acclaimed ten volumeRoutledge Encyclopedia of Philosophyin a single work. By selecting and presenting–in full–the most important entries for the beginning philosopher and truncating the rest of the entries to survey the breadth of the field,The Shorter REPwill be the only desk reference on philosophy that anyone will need. Comprising over 900 entries and covering the major philosophers and philosophical topics, The Shorter REP includes the following special features: *Over 130 comprehensive, in-depth entries as they appear in the ten volumeRoutledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy *Unrivalled coverage of major philosophers, themes, movements and periods making the volume indispensable for any student or general reader *Revised versions of many of the most important entries, including fresh suggestions for further reading *Over 20 brand new entries on important new topics *Entries by many leading philosopherssuch as Bernard Williams, Martha Nussbaum, Richard Rorty, Onora O’Neill, T.M.Scanlon and Anthony Appiah
To be responsible for their acts, agents must both perform those acts voluntarily and in some sense know what they are doing. Of these requirements, the voluntariness condition has been much discussed, but the epistemic condition has received far less attention. In Who Knew? George Sher seeks to rectify that imbalance. The book is divided in two halves, the first of which criticizes a popular but inadequate way of understanding the epistemic condition, while the second seeks to develop a more adequate alternative. It is often assumed that agents are responsible only for what they are aware of doing or bringing about–that their responsibility extends only as far as the searchlight of their consciousness. The book criticizes this “searchlight view” on two main grounds: first, that it is inconsistent with our attributions of responsibility to a broad range of agents who should but do not realize that they are acting wrongly or foolishly, and, second, that the view is not independently defensible. The book’s positive view construes the crucial relation between an agent and his failure to recognize the wrongness or foolishness of what he is doing in causal terms: the agent is responsible when, and because, his failure to respond to his reasons for believing that he is acting wrongly or foolishly has its origins in the same constitutive psychology that generally does render him reason-responsive.
Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: CHAPTER III. ON QUALITY OF PLEASURE. I Alluded in the last chapter to the two great unsettled questions, to what degree happiness is different for different people, and how far it is in each man’s own power for himself. Both these questions concern the subject of this chapter. If happiness is different for different people, how far ought it to be so ? And how far can we raise the character of our happiness ? There is perhaps a disposition in our age to accept A morality jTi i iT ofhappi- a morality of happiness as better, more like what we ness, espe- expect morality to be, than one of rule: such a hoi,,1 morality may take the form of a utilitarianism recog- rj;e nizing different kinds of pleasures, some worthier and is more c- more to be striven after than others. Religion too than’a mo- has not unfrequently shown itself more in harmony i1ety of with the moral philosophy which speaks much of happiness than with that which speaks much of law. And though it is true that when religion has spoken the language of bare utilitarianism, as in Paley, it has not much commended itself to real human feeling: still when it is presented to us not only as conformable to our desire, but also as what is to regulate our desire, uniting with its promises to make us happy a call upon us for effort after a worthy happiness, and elevation of our idea of happiness (as we are told on the one hand that the ways of religion are pleasantness and her paths peace, while on the other hand we pray that we may love that which God commands and desire that he promises); the morality which is thus proposed to us has charms in our view which do not belong to a morality of rule. But this But then it is to be observed that this more at- worthiness tractive form of utilitarianism involves …
ما از اخلاق چه انتظاری داریم؟ این سوال شاید تاحدودی برای عموم مردم و یا متخصصان این رشته قابل پاسخ باشد؛ اینکه خوب بودن را به ما بیاموزد و در تنظیم روابط فردی م...
جشن کتاب تهران به ایستگاه سی و یکم رسیده است. حال و احوال نشر کتاب خوب نیست و باید فرهنگدوستان را به خرید و هدیه دادن کتاب ترغیب نمود. خانه اخلاقپژوهان جوان ب...
بنیاد کتابهای اخلاق اسلامی عمدتا پالایش جان از آلودگیها و آراستن آن به زیباییها است. اندیشه محوری این قبیل کتابها آن است که انسان فعلی آنی نیست که باید باشد...
-
0 Comments