E-LOGOS最新文献 - Book学术

Philosophical Discourse on Image and Text (A Historical Analysis of Image and Text Relationship) 图像与文本的哲学话语(对图像与文本关系的历史分析)

E-LOGOS Pub Date : 2023-08-31 DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.497

A. J. A. Susanti

引用次数: 0

Fundamental Uncertainty in Model Predictions: Analysis of Modern Macroeconomic Models from the Perspective of Friedman's Instrumentalism 模型预测中的基本不确定性:从弗里德曼工具主义的角度分析现代宏观经济模型

E-LOGOS Pub Date : 2023-08-31 DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.498

Jáchym Novotný

引用次数: 0

Byung-Chul Han's Burnout Society 韩炳哲(Byung-Chul Han)的Burnout Society

E-LOGOS Pub Date : 2023-02-14 DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.496

Adam Šimčík

引用次数: 0

The Role of Federal Government in the United States War Economy during World War II 第二次世界大战期间联邦政府在美国战争经济中的作用

E-LOGOS Pub Date : 2023-01-13 DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.493

Zdeňka Johnson

引用次数: 0

Private militaries: Mercenaries, or fighters of a just war? 私人军队:雇佣兵，还是正义战争的战士?

E-LOGOS Pub Date : 2023-01-13 DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.492

Tom Křížek

引用次数: 0

Why is there still a war? On the latent meaning of war aggression 为什么还有战争?论战争侵略的潜在意义

E-LOGOS Pub Date : 2023-01-13 DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.495

Hynek Tippelt

引用次数: 0

Analysis of Technological and Economical Aspects of the On-Going Russian-Ukrainian Hybrid War: The Question of Modernity of Russian Army 正在进行的俄乌混合战争的技术经济分析——俄罗斯军队的现代性问题

E-LOGOS Pub Date : 2023-01-13 DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.494

A. Tokárciková

引用次数: 0

Usury and the Paretian Objection 高利贷与家长异议

E-LOGOS Pub Date : 2022-08-02 DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.491

L. Máslo

{"title":"Usury and the Paretian Objection","authors":"L. Máslo","doi":"10.18267/j.e-logos.491","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18267/j.e-logos.491","url":null,"abstract":": This paper has the following goals: 1) to prove that the contract of usury suffers from a self-contradiction, both from the viewpoint of the lender and the borrower; 2) to demonstrate the self-contradictory nature of the contract of usury by means of the Fisher model of the inter-temporal choice; 3) to prove that both the lender and the borrower pronounce the consent to the basic contract involuntarily because the former as well as the latter is acting under the indirect coercion; 4) to respond to Paretian objection that the Pareto improvement implies the mutual voluntariness, which is why there is no justification for the state to not enforce the contracts of usury. The author contends that from a subjective viewpoint, the contract of usury is a complex of two contracts which contradict each other: the basic contract and the super-contract. From the lender’s perspective, the basic contract is a loan and the super-contract is a sale of the loan. Since the lender negates his will to give a loan by the sale of the loan, the lender’s consent to the contract of usury as whole is self-contradictory. From the borrower’s perspective, the basic contract is a gift to the lender and the super-contract is a sale of this gift for a loan. Since the borrower negates his will to give a gift by the sale of the gift, the borrower’s consent to the contract of usury as a whole is self-contradictory. Next, the author contends that from an objective viewpoint, the contract of usury is an example of a non-equal “exchange”, i. e. a complex of an exchange (loan) and a transfer (usurious interest). Since the borrower does not give the transfer voluntarily, the lender violates the commutative justice by the contract of usury. To the Paretian objection that since both the lender and the borrower move onto a higher indifference curve thanks to the contract of usury, it must be a voluntary exchange, the author responds that the Pareto improvement does not imply the mutual voluntariness. The way how both the lender and the borrower move onto a higher indifference curve is not a voluntary exchange. There is no way to move onto a higher indifference curve in the contract of usury through a voluntary exchange. The contract of usury is neither an exchange, nor voluntary. It is not an exchange because it violates the equality in exchange. It is not voluntary, either, because it suffers from a double self-contradiction and voluntariness cannot be predicated to a self-contradictory (i. e. non-being) act of will. The author concludes that the state cannot and must not enforce the contracts of usury. It cannot because these contracts suffer from a double self-contradiction. It must not, either, because these contracts violate the commutative justice and it is the purpose of the state to protect the justice.","PeriodicalId":439437,"journal":{"name":"E-LOGOS","volume":"156 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124374956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Dangerous epistemology 危险的认识论

E-LOGOS Pub Date : 2022-06-07 DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.490

Pablos Kubes

引用次数: 0

'tis but a Scratch: on the Moral Neutrality of Tattoos 这只是一个划痕:关于纹身的道德中立性

E-LOGOS Pub Date : 2022-06-06 DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.489

Michael Campbell

引用次数: 0