Search

Most people believe some moral propositions are true. Most people would say that they know that rape is wrong, torturing people is wrong, and so on. But despite decades of intense epistemological study, philosophers cannot even provide a rudimentary sketch of moral knowledge. In my view, the fact that we have very strong epistemic confidence in some fundamental moral propositions and the fact that it is extremely difficult for us to provide even the basics of an account of moral knowledge gives us an important clue. Both of these facts stem from the very nature of moral knowledge. In this paper I provide an intuitionist account of moral knowledge. I try to remove misunderstanding and add to our understanding of the contemporary account of self-evident moral propositions. For a theory of moral knowledge to be acceptable it must explain both the moral knowledge we have and why it is so very difficult for us to explain. My theory meets both requirements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We continue the investigation of the first paper where we studied logics with various negations including empirical negation and co-negation. We established how such logics can be treated uniformly with R. Sylvan's CCω as the basis. In this paper we use this result to obtain cut-free labelled sequent calculi for the logics.

We investigate the relationship between M. De's empirical negation in Kripke and Beth Semantics. It turns out empirical negation, as well as co-negation, corresponds to different logics under different semantics. We then establish the relationship between logics related to these negations under unified syntax and semantics based on R. Sylvan's CCω.

Copyright of Studia Historiae Scientiarum is the property of Jagiellonian University Press 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 Discusiones Filosóficas is the property of Universidad de Caldas 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.)

Most physics theories are deterministic, with the notable exception of quantum mechanics which, however, comes plagued by the so-called measurement problem. This state of affairs might well be due to the inability of standard mathematics to "speak" of indeterminism, its inability to present us a worldview in which new information is created as time passes. In such a case, scientific determinism would only be an illusion due to the timeless mathematical language scientists use. To investigate this possibility it is necessary to develop an alternative mathematical language that is both powerful enough to allow scientists to compute predictions and compatible with indeterminism and the passage of time. We suggest that intuitionistic mathematics provides such a language and we illustrate it in simple terms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The category of ethics is traditionally divided among researchers in this field in to three branches: applied ethics, normative ethics and meta-ethics. Despite the three branches, each of these branches has both an effect on the other. Medical ethics as a branch of applied ethics on the one hand is influenced by the views of ethics philosophers and on the other hand due to the importance of the medical profession requires special attention. The present article uses a descriptive and analytical method to apply the philosophy of Ṣadrīan ethics with one of the important views of medical ethics, namely Principalism. The authors of this study, by examining the relevant texts, have argued the following results that are stated briefly. Principalism is in line with Ṣadrīan moral view in that according to Mullā Ṣadrā's view of moral realism, moral concepts have an existential and external meaning, and therefore moral behavior and advice must be reflected in the world. Principalism also emphasizes the improvement of the moral performance of physicians and clinicians during medical interventions. However, the emphasis on Principalism should not lead to the molding of the clinician's mind, and according to Mullā Ṣadrā's moral Intuitionism, the moral conscience of the physician and those involved in medicine should always show their role during treatment. Based on the study of Mullā Ṣadrā 's views, it is inferred that among the four principles of medical ethics, the two principles of beneficence and non-maleficence are the first priority, and the principles of justice and respect for autonomy are considered a means of profitability and non-prejudicial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How Moore's open question argument works, insofar as it does, remains a matter of controversy. The author's purpose here is to construct an open question argument based on a novel interpretation of how Moore's argument might work. In order to sidestep exegetical questions, he does not claim to be offering Moore's own argument. Rather, the author offers a reconstruction, making use of important elements of Moore's methodology and assumptions that could be reasonable within a Moorean viewpoint. The crucial role within the argument is played by what the author calls the real thought move. He shows that the reconstructed argument is more defensible from some standard objections than the common construction. The author finishes by drawing attention to a neglected objective that would make sense within Moore's viewpoint, showing that it fits with a major commitment of Bonjour's moderate rationalism, and showing how the package might be important for the non-naturalist today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two mereological theories are presented based on a primitive apartness relation along with binary relations of mereological excess and weak excess, respectively. It is shown that both theories are acceptable from the standpoint of constructive reasoning while remaining faithful to the spirit of classical mereology. The two theories are then compared and assessed with regard to their extensional import. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comparing Nietzsche’s moral psychology and the social intuitionist approach to moral judgment proposed by Jonathan Haidt, this paper reveals remarkable similarities between the two models. It also clarifies what implications Nietzsche drew from his description of human psychology and the perspective changes these entail for understanding ourselves as “moral beings”.

Recent developments in experimental research on decision-making have received attention from moral philosophers trying to explain classical moral dilemmas. The class of cognitive illusions known as framing effects have received particular attention because they appear to play a role in explaining the famous trolley-problem. Some philosophers maintain that cognitive illusions such as framing effects seriously undermine classical point of views in moral philosophy such as normative ethics and moral intuitionism. This essay investigates whether, in light of empirical research on framing effects, we can still maintain an intuitionist point of view, and what the available data imply in general for moral philosophy.

One of the most important "folk" anti‐realist thoughts about certain areas of our thought and discourse—basic taste, for instance, or comedy—is that their lack of objectivity crystallises in the possibility of "faultless disagreements": situations where one party accepts P, another rejects P, and neither is guilty of any kind of mistake of substance or shortcoming of cognitive process. On close inspection, however, it proves challenging to make coherent sense of this idea, and a majority of theorists have come to reject it as incoherent. There are two significant exceptions in the contemporary literature: relativists often hold it up as something of a coup for their view that it can make straightforward sense of faultless disagreement; and the author of this paper has argued (Wright 2006) that making judicious intuitionistic revisions to classical logic can provide resources that suffice to stabilise the notion. The present paper argues that neither relativism nor intuitionism in fact provides a satisfactory account and indicates how an alethic pluralist framework enables us to do better. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper I will make a review of the core elements of the recent natural law ethical theories in analytic philosophy. I will expose the elements they share, and then its more essential differences, especially those related to epistemology and metaphysics. Finally, I shall explore the possibilities of development for natural law theories, and its metaethical implications, especially those related to a metaphysical and epistemological grounding for natural law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I model the version of Wilfrid Sellars' Myth of the Given argument that John McDowell presents in Mind and World along the lines of one of Graham Priest's inclosure paradoxes, with McDowell's "spinning of the wheels" worry being a worry about denial of Transcendence and his "exculpation not justification" worry being a worry about denial of Closure. This exercise reveals much, importantly: (1) McDowell's conceptualism does not in fact, resolve the paradox, and (2) on the other hand, with insights from Graham Harman, Hilan Bensusan, and the Rinzai tradition of Zen Buddhism, a non-conceptualist, indexicalist, epistemology can. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on the moral development ideal of William Whewell, one of the most important intellectual figures of the 19th century Britain. According to Whewell, morality is an ideal of development. This is a process that continues throughout human life in which there is true happiness at the end. In every moment we live, we have the opportunity to be a more virtuous and better person. According to him, the most important task of human beings is to realize this ideal of development. The motivation behind this ideal is to bring morality, science and religion together in a rational system in harmony with each other. The source of this motivation is the criticism of irrationality and inconsistency directed by utilitarian thinkers (especially, John Stuart Mill), the most important opponents of ethical intuitionism. As a way of making these three areas consistent with each other, Whewell bases morality and science on a theological basis. Accordingly, God, the creator of the universe and human beings, has laid down certain principles that will regulate both nature and human actions. The duty of morality and science is to discover these principles. Therefore, morality and science are simply a process of discovery. Whewell argues that the basic principles of morality can only be known intuitively. The main reason why Whewell is considered within the ethical intuitionist tradition is this view. But this process of knowing the basic principles does not in any way imply an irrationality. The basic power that intuitively perceives these principles is reason. Conscience is a faculty that approves the judgments of reason. However, in Whewell's philosophy, conscience corresponds to an aspect of reason rather than being a faculty separate from reason. Thus, Whewell is distinguished from the intuitive moral thinkers who regard conscience as a faculty separate from reason, which grasps the basic principles of morality. According to Whewell, conscience is the guide of a human being but the judgments of conscience can sometimes be mistaken. Therefore, conscience must be constantly controlled and developed by reason. This point is where Whewell bases his moral philosophy. Because one's duty is to continuously improve their conscience and make all their judgments in accordance with the highest rule. This corresponds to moral development. The concepts of the highest good, duty, and virtue are extremely important in moral development. The ultimate rule in Whewell's philosophy expresses the will of God. The obligation to obey God's commands corresponds to duty, and fulfilling the duty corresponds to virtue. Thus, any violation of duty is a violation of God's command. Failing to do the duty is to go against the will of God. In a religious context, this corresponds to sin. Whewell argues, however, that the ideal of moral progress cannot be fulfilled by reason alone. The main reason for this is the limited structure of reason. Therefore, reason needs the help of revelation in this process. Nevertheless, in order to preserve the rational ground of his moral philosophy Whewell prioritizes reason over revelation and natural religion over revealed religion. However, Whewell still argues the help of revelation necessary for the fulfillment of the ideal of progress. He even says that those who do not accept this help of revelation and do not believe in revelation should be condemned. Because, according to him, this ideal of development can be completed with the information beyond the reach of reason that can only be bestowed by revelation. Whewell goes so far as to argue that no one was able to complete their moral evolution before Jesus Christ descended on earth. He also shows that revelation did not occur at that time as a justification. The question of whether Whewell's claim has an impact on the rationality of his philosophy is the main problem of this article. Here I argue that Whewell's approach that the ideal of moral development cannot be completed without the help of revelation makes his philosophy controversial, even if it does not completely remove the rational ground of moral theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1928 Ivan Orlov published a remarkable paper which contains the first formulation of a relevant logic. The paper remained largely unknown to English-speakers until this discovery of relevant logic was shown by Kosta Do en in 1992. By that time the material on relevant logic was well known; however, there is more of interest in Orlov's paper than this: his remarks on intuitionism, the motivation for his construction, and its wider implications. This paper explains and reflects on these matters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I present theoretical assumptions behind Teoria / Literatura , a multifaceted digital research and publishing project on 20th-century Polish literary thought. The point of departure is the conjecture that the tensions between the digital and the humanistic in present-day DH help bring out in full relief the cardinal conflict line in Polish literary theory – between formalism/structuralism on the one hand and phenomenology on the other. Conversely, the order of concepts in the corpus of Polish literary theory enables the researcher to pinpoint the relation of the humanistic and the digital (or formalist) within DH so that it might be challenged and/or upgraded. In the first section, I provide an overview of the project's strata and its wide-ranging goal, i.e., a corpus of Polish literary theory. In section two, I examine the way in which the structure of the corpus can help elucidate the general problem of the relation between the digital and the humanistic in DH. Specifically, I relate this issue to the quarrel in constructive mathematics between mathematical intuitionism and formalism. The third section is devoted to a synecdochal representation of the general problem of the duality of intuitionism and formalism – the visualisation of narrative temporality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Argument: The paper explores Hermann Weyl's turn to intuitionism through a philosophical prism of normative framework transitions. It focuses on three central themes that occupied Weyl's thought: the notion of the continuum, logical existence, and the necessity of intuitionism, constructivism, and formalism to adequately address the foundational crisis of mathematics. The analysis of these themes reveals Weyl's continuous endeavor to deal with such fundamental problems and suggests a view that provides a different perspective concerning Weyl's wavering foundational positions. Building on a philosophical model of scientific framework transitions and the special role that normative indecision or ambivalence plays in the process, the paper examines Weyl's motives for considering such a radical shift in the first place. It concludes by showing that Weyl's shifting stances should be regarded as symptoms of a deep, convoluted intrapersonal process of self-deliberation induced by exposure to external criticism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conception of the paper is connected with bringing forward the reflection of Leon Petrażycki on intuitive law. For this purpose I analyze the genesis and dynamics of this phenomenon on the cultural-historical level, as well as with reference to issues belonging to the scope of positive law. In addition, I broaden the research field with the range of problems touching on intuitionism, morality, and also independent ethics of Janusz Kotarbinski. The starting point of the methodological optics I assume is constituted by the multi-aspectual transformations surrounding us in the sphere of axiology. Hence, if the pedagogical aspects are taken into account, it seems to me justified to undertake some actions in order to search for the logically consistent, sensible and universal solutions, which can become an ethical guide-post for the contemporary human being.

The paper focuses on cosmological ideas of a twentieth-century Russian philosopher Nikolay Lossky (1870-1965). It specifies the place of these ideas within the entire framework of his philosophical views, as well as in the context of his topology of philosophical systems, in particular ― the discrimination between organic and non-organic worldview. A historico-philosophical analysis of Lossky’s cosmology allows revealing the interaction of gnoseological and ontological principles of his system, e.g. explicating the difference of Lossky’s intuitionism from the one of Bergson. The key section of the organic worldview is the doctrine of the hierarchy of substantival agents: the hierarchical personalism, as well as the notions of transcreation, dynamic understanding of matter, and the doctrine of free will closely related to it. The paper specifies the peculiarities of Lossky’s interpretations of panvitalism and panpsychism, as well as the doctrine of reincarnation, which has a particular place in his system. The final stage of Lossky’s cosmological ideas development is his ontological aesthetics: on this stage he understands the world as an embodiment of beauty. The conclusion is drawn that Lossky’s cosmological doctrine is Christian and metaphysical in its nature.

We begin with the idea that lines of reasoning are continuous mental processes and develop a notion of continuity in proof. This requires abstracting the notion of a proof as a set of sentences ordered by provability. We can then distinguish between discrete steps of a proof and possibly continuous stages, defining indexing functions to pick these out. Proof stages can be associated with the application of continuously variable rules, connecting continuity in lines of reasoning with continuously variable reasons. Some examples of continuous proofs are provided. We conclude by presenting some fundamental facts about continuous proofs, analogous to continuous structural rules and composition. We take this to be a development on its own, as well as lending support to non-finitistic constructionism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intuitionism had been one of the most prominent ethical approaches over two hundred years, especially on the British Isles. In the first third of the 20th century it started losing its power; however, in the last few years several philosophers have been trying to renew this approach, which has made it one of the most discussed topics of contemporary metaethics. Intuitionism is a foundationalist approach which regards basic moral beliefs, i.e., intuitions, as self-evident. Nonetheless, modern intuitionists have to cope with empirical evidence which shows that intuitions are not as reliable a source of moral knowledge as would be necessary in this case. The aim of the paper is to present and discuss contemporary critique of intuitionism. First, I introduce intuitionism and its basic assumptions, both ontological and epistemological. Second, I focus on the criticism itself, especially on its empirical aspects concerning the role and the reliability of intuitions. As some of the proponents of intuitionism try to react to these objections and create a less flawed version of this approach, in the third part, I describe one of these attempts, i.e., Michael Huemer's revisionary intuitionism. Finally, I try to explain why intuitionism -- despite these efforts -- remains a problematic approach and why ethics might be better off without it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To make evaluations about the morally relevant impacts of algorithms, transparency is needed. This paper lays out discussion of algorithms and transparency in an explicitly moral analysis with a special focus on the domain of justice and security. The paper provides an account of the moral import of transparency, defined itself as an instrumental value denoting a state of affairs conducive to acquisition of knowledge about some X. A normative account of transparency is outlined relying on an intuitionist framework rooted in the works of Ross and Robert Audi. It will be argued that transparency can be derived as a subsidiary (prima facie) principle from other duties including beneficence and justice and that it is groundable in the value of knowledge. Building on this foundation, the paper examines transparency and duty conflict with a special focus on algorithms in justice and security, recognising that complete transparency can be impossible where duties conflict. It is argued that as a subsidiary (prima facie) principle, transparency is overridable but ineradicable, which is to say that sufficiently justifiable reasons for secrecy or opacity can licence limiting transparency, that is, there may be occasion where full transparency is not our final duty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigate the relationship between M. De's empirical negation in Kripke and Beth Semantics. It turns out empirical negation, as well as co-negation, corresponds to different logics under different semantics. We then establish the relationship between logics related to these negations under unified syntax and semantics based on R. Sylvan's CCw. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Constructivism is the metaethical position stating that although we cannot have direct access to moral facts, we can still come up with a set of principles that can be justified and that ought to be respected by individuals. The strength of these moral principles derives from the fact that they are the result of a procedure respecting certain desirable conditions. Constructivism concerns the methodology of political philosophy, being preoccupied with the process of generating and justifying moral principles. In this review article I present the main contentions of constructivism (focusing especially on the Kantian constructivism advanced by Rawls and Scanlon), describe its positioning on the realist-antirealist axis, and compare it with its main competitor in the field of metaethical views, intuitionism. I dedicate a separate section to the method of reflective equilibrium, which represents an important part of several metaethical accounts, be they constructivist, realist, or intuitionist. I show how reflective equilibrium represents the main instrument constructivists can employ in order to capture the appeal of relying on intuitions in moral theorizing, without leaning toward intuitionism. Toward the end of the article I present G. A. Cohen's (2003, 2008) criticism of constructivism. I focus on the replies Ronzoni and Valentini (2008), Hall (2013), de Maagt (2014, 2016) and Rossi (2016) give to Cohen, ending with a criticism of my own. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In their recent book Buchanan and Powell claim that there is moral progress. Their analysis focuses on increasing inclusiveness, yet they also suggest other dimensions as possible indicators-improvements in the concept of morality and refinements in moral motivation. In the following I present empirical data on changes in moral understanding that occurred during the second half of the 20th century in Germany. These changes concern an increasing delimitation of the moral realm, the rise of an ethics of responsibility, the displacement of an orientation to super ego dictates by a more ego-syntonic type of moral motivation. This research largely follows the 'cognitivist' paradigm which I start off defending against Haidt's counter proposal of moral intuitionism. Feasible explanatory factors for the changes documented are put forward-processes of secularization and changes in socialization styles-and their interpretation as indicators of moral progress is discussed. The paper ends with brief speculations concerning possible reasons for current moral regressions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I develop a view on set-theoretic ontology I call Universe-Indeterminism, according to which there is a unique but indeterminate universe of sets. I argue that Solomon Feferman's work on semi-constructive set theories can be adapted to this project, and develop a philosophical motivation for a semi-constructive set theory closely based on Feferman's but tailored to the Universe-Indeterminist's viewpoint. I also compare the emergent Universe-Indeterminist view to some more familiar views on set-theoretic ontology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A recognizable topological model construction shows that any consistent principles of classical set theory, including the validity of the law of the excluded third, together with a standard class theory, do not suffice to demonstrate the general validity of the law of the excluded third. This result calls into question the classical mathematician's ability to offer solid justifications for the logical principles he or she favors.