Search

Copyright of Journal for Business, Economics & Ethics / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts und Unternehmensethik is the property of Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The purpose of this article is to thoroughly research Habermas’ view of technology with regard to his discourse ethics. In the first part of the article, Habermas’ theoretical starting points concerning the question of technology are presented. In the next segment, findings are presented, which can be traced mainly in an indirect way from Habermas’ discussions on media theory and from his theory of the colonization of the lifeworld. In the next step, Habermas’ relation to the phenomenon of mass media is addressed. The mass media are understood as a concrete expression of modern progress and are closely linked to technological development. In the last part of the article, Habermas’ relation to the internet is presented. The internet is widely considered an alternative to the mass media in modern times. The article presents a holistic analysis of Habermas’ relation to technology. It also presents some interesting findings regarding Habermas’ positioning towards the mass media and the internet.

In this article Habermas’s discourse ethics is critically interpreted. The article starts with a brief intellectual biography of Habermas (section 1), showing that his life and work has always had a strong ethical and political dimension – leading to the concept of discourse ethics. Next, it is indicated how Habermas’s work in the 1970s culminated via four steps in his major philosophical work – the Theory of Communicative Action (section 2) published in 1981. In the next two sections Habermas Theory of Communicative Action is applied to ethics and morality in the form of his discourse ethics – the heart of this contribution (section 3). In this process the following four aspects of Habermas’s discourse ethics are discussed: Its qualified Kantian deontological dimension, as well as its universalist, cognitivist, and formalist dimensions. In the following section (4) the discussion of discourse ethics is shifted to Habermas’s theory of law, deliberative politics, and democracy which is a further application of ideas developed in his Theory of Communicative Action. The contribution then ends with some critical remarks on Habermas discourse ethics and sketch of law and politics (section 5) Three arguments are presented in this regard. First, Habermas argument is judged to be too closely related to abstract rationality. Secondly the distinction that Habermas makes between morality and ethics is critically investigated. Finally, the Habermasian use of justification in his argument is critically compared with the concept of application. These points of criticism, though, indicate that the debate on Habermas’s discourse ethics is ongoing. Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: This article deals with the concept of discourse ethics (in the Kantian tradition of ethics) as developed firstly by Karel Otto Apel and later refined by Jurgen Habermas for his own purposes. The line of argumentation developed here has significant relevance for philosophy, moral theory, law, and theology. Discourse ethics can be considered as a contemporary version of Kantian deontological ethics after the linguistic turn.

Some ideas expressed in the collective monograph Universality in Morality (2020), edited by Ruben Apressyan, are here critically examined. The book is based on the results of a large-scale study by professional ethical philosophers devoted to the question of the nature of universality in morality and the mechanisms of universalisation of individual maxims and norms from antiquity to modern ethical theories, represented above all by the analytical tradition in philosophy. Of great interest is the analysis of related phenomena in morality, which makes it possible to determine the causes and nature of the transformation of morality in different eras and the accompanying change in the terminological apparatus of absolute ethical universalism, considered to be the starting point in the analysis of key modern concepts of moral universality. The article also suggests possible avenues for continued research in this area which could prompt modifications not only to the history of the concept of universality in morality, but also to our assessment of the contribution of individual authors and entire eras to the progress of human civilisation. This concerns above all the moral theory of contractarianism and the Enlightenment. Focus on their ideas goes a long way to determining the direction of current historical-philosophical research that reconstructs the history of ethical teachings and individual concepts. The importance attached today to a new view of the theory of the social contract, considered not only from socio-political but also from moral positions, forces us to approach in a new way the question concerning the universality of the key philosophical categories developed within this theory throughout its history. Elaborating the ideas set forth in the monograph, the author also stresses the relevance of the problem of justifying the thesis about the moral law as an analogue of the universal law of nature in the modern context.

The article analyzes the theoretical foundations of the modern project of rational ethics, in which the ethics of discourse is interpreted as a critical theory of society and a critic of modern morality. I. Kant was one of the first to offer the possibility of generalizing the norms of morality and perception of ethics as a transcendental critique of morality. Neo-Kantianism develops ethics as the most important part of the philosophical system and fixes its scope by the idealistic theory of morality (H. Cohen, P. Natorp). In Russian philosophy, modern ethics is perceived as a normative theory that has to do with issues of self-determination, moral regulation, and freedom of choice. The origins of discourse ethics in the philosophy of the 20th century go back to the “pragmatic turn” and to vigorous discussions about hermeneutics of language and its a priori status in German philosophy, and in analytical philosophy regarding the understanding of metaetics. The modern program of ethics of discourse receives meaningful justification as the logic of moral argumentation in the social philosophy of J. Habermas and in the transcendental pragmatics K.-O. Apel. The ethics of discourse is born from the real need to justify moral requirements and norms. Ethics as a critique of moral argument is associated with the pre-reflexive horizon of the life world, why it is a deontological, formalistic and universal ethics. Two significant projects of discourse ethics, presented in the article as an analysis, should be defined as “weak and strong” variants of philosophical transcendental idealism in modern science.

The paper discusses Wittgenstein’s approaches to ethics within two contrastive contexts, e.g., pragmatism and cooperative-discursive normative practice. The first section revisits the fiasco of his early “negative” ethics. The second section subsequently shows how Wittgenstein’s mature concept of blind rule-following displaces normativity but simultaneously becomes the key predictor for discourse ethics (or, rather, a specific kind of it). The final section discusses the pros and cons of finitism in the light of contemporary philosophy of mind. As a conclusion, the author provides evidence for her hypothesis that there is no normative (embodied) mind without a manifest normative competence, which includes moral judgment and discursive competence.

The article provides information on the counseling of pregnancy conflict, focusing on abortion law for unwanted pregnancy, availability of material ethics and learning from discourse ethics. Topics include psychosocial counseling on prenatal diagnostics, sexual education prevention and correct use of contraceptives.

Copyright of Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft is the property of Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Discourse Ethics, as a new type of procedural ethics, considers only the logical-formal dimension of reason, i.e., the capacity of the partner of discourse to make claims of validity on what is said and to resolve, through the discourse, the constraints present in in daily life. The communicative capacity presupposes, however, not only the ability to argue, then an anthropology of knowledge, but also an anthropology of values that allows to judge values, and which contains the conditions beforehand to understand what is right.

This paper, starting from the question “Which etichs for what future?”, retraces a few streets of ethical reflection, subdividing the exploration in moments of classical Greece (with Socrates, Plato and Aristotle), of modernity (with Kant, developments science, Hegel) and of the current globalized world (with Jürgen Habermas and Karl-Otto Apel). The problem of values, in particular, and of ethics, in general, arises today, as in the past, in a double sense: regards, on the one hand, their possible foundation or legitimation, on the other, their possible sharing and acceptance by all members of the community. Discourse ethics, especially in the version theorized by Karl-Otto Apel, appears more congenial in outlining the minimum basis of a common ethics shared, guaranteed by the universal consensus of ethics intrinsic to the discourse.

The debate concerning the validity and foundation of ethical behavior as opposed to that which is dictated by norms cannot be resolved in the field of methodical thought nor by using deductive procedures, its resolution lies rather in theoretical philosophy in general and concerns the same scenario as that of critical philosophy. What one is looking for is a way to organize communication on a social level and to implement discursive reasoning.The problem is twofold: on the one hand the problem of communication concerns the structure of society and the possibility of communicating freely independent of dominion, on the other hand it relates to transcendental thought relating to the possibility of creating a foundation for ethics.The latter (ethic foundation) is always a pre- requisite and is activated in discourse itself.

Copyright of Ethik in der Medizin is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

A central function of mass media in democracies is to make political processes public. In this paper, starting from the theory of communicative action by Jürgen Habermas, a communication ethical perspective for journalists is discussed. Based on this theory, the journalist is seen as a lawyer in the public discourse. As a lawyer he should — on behalf of the interested public - question critically the actions of politicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the Swiss version of IFLA 's Code of Ethics there is no mention about whistleblowing at all. This is where this article starts some considerations about methods of implementing stipulated guidelines (especially of ethical quality). In general, there are three methods which can be distinguished corresponding to three different types of ethics : firstly, focussing on prescribing procedures (procedural ethics such as discourse ethics or deontology), secondly, evaluating values and their collocation (virtue ethics), and thirdly, considering pros and cons by scenarios (utilitarianism). In praxis, these methodic guidelines should be amended by didactic methods in order to support adressees in adopting their Code of Ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The contribution presents information ethics as applied ethics in library and information science with some of its essential concerns. Thereby, it is proposed to elaborate and review norms for action in the professional field via the procedures of „situative discourse ethics“. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal for Business, Economics & Ethics / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts und Unternehmensethik is the property of Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article develops an ethical approach to a concept of publicity, that enables to practice the liberation from guilt and injustice. The usual narrowing of repentance to the ritual of private confession is not adequate to Christian tradition. It also objects to the task of a theological ethics to call humans to the "liberating reversion into being a creature" (H.G. Ulrich). The concept of publicity against the usual contrast "public - private" is developed from the juxtaposition "public - hidden". On this way it shows theological criteria for public relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Ethik in der Medizin is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Bernard Bolzano repeatedly tried to provide an analysis of the concept of time. This paper develops a detailed reconstruction of Bolzano's analysis. Thereby it clarifies the logical form of the analysis and thus discovers its principal problem:While the analysis may well incorporate an important insight on our conception of time, it cannot succeed as an analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A critical response to the article “Relativismus und Menschenrechte” by Marie-Luisa Frick, published in this issue of the journal, is presented. Analyzing Frick's test through the lens of argumentation theory, the author addresses several issues, including the philosophy of human rights from the perspectives of cultural relativism and universalism, applied ethics, and the connection between epistemological universalism and ethical particularism.