宽容的悖论(可解决和不可解决)

Ricardo Corrêa de Araújo
{"title":"宽容的悖论(可解决和不可解决)","authors":"Ricardo Corrêa de Araújo","doi":"10.5007/1677-2954.2019v18n1p61","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to present three paradoxes involved in the notion of toleration and to analyze its possible solutions, using the results of this discussion to describe a possible fourth paradox, related to the value attributed to the toleration by the agents involved, which is considered as constitutive and therefore insoluble. For this, a structural notion of toleration as a moral ideal will be presented, discussing its elements. Then, from the relation with the specific components of this notion, the three paradoxes mentioned will be analyzed, two very well-known and a third little discussed and still without a name, and their possible solutions, that will require, respectively, the presentation of arguments in favor of toleration, the discussion of its limits and a demanding interpretation of the component of moral disapproval of that structure. Finally, starting from the discussion of the previous paradoxes and its solutions, a possible fourth paradox will be proposed, not explicitly formulated as such in these discussions, but whose constitutive elements have already been indicated since the eighteenth century, as well as the reasons for its insolubility.","PeriodicalId":143268,"journal":{"name":"Ethic@: an International Journal for Moral Philosophy","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Os paradoxos (solúveis e insolúveis) da tolerância\",\"authors\":\"Ricardo Corrêa de Araújo\",\"doi\":\"10.5007/1677-2954.2019v18n1p61\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this paper is to present three paradoxes involved in the notion of toleration and to analyze its possible solutions, using the results of this discussion to describe a possible fourth paradox, related to the value attributed to the toleration by the agents involved, which is considered as constitutive and therefore insoluble. For this, a structural notion of toleration as a moral ideal will be presented, discussing its elements. Then, from the relation with the specific components of this notion, the three paradoxes mentioned will be analyzed, two very well-known and a third little discussed and still without a name, and their possible solutions, that will require, respectively, the presentation of arguments in favor of toleration, the discussion of its limits and a demanding interpretation of the component of moral disapproval of that structure. Finally, starting from the discussion of the previous paradoxes and its solutions, a possible fourth paradox will be proposed, not explicitly formulated as such in these discussions, but whose constitutive elements have already been indicated since the eighteenth century, as well as the reasons for its insolubility.\",\"PeriodicalId\":143268,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethic@: an International Journal for Moral Philosophy\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethic@: an International Journal for Moral Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5007/1677-2954.2019v18n1p61\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethic@: an International Journal for Moral Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5007/1677-2954.2019v18n1p61","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文的目的是提出涉及容忍概念的三个悖论,并分析其可能的解决方案,使用此讨论的结果来描述可能的第四个悖论,与所涉及的代理人归因于容忍的价值有关,这被认为是构成的,因此是不可解决的。为此,将提出作为一种道德理想的宽容的结构性概念,并讨论其要素。然后,从与这一概念的具体组成部分的关系出发,我们将分析所提到的三个悖论,其中两个非常有名,第三个讨论得很少,还没有名字,以及它们可能的解决方案,这将分别要求,提出支持宽容的论点,讨论其限制,以及对该结构的道德反对组成部分的严格解释。最后,从前面的悖论及其解决方案的讨论开始,将提出可能的第四个悖论,在这些讨论中没有明确地表述,但其构成要素自18世纪以来已经指出,以及其不可溶解性的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Os paradoxos (solúveis e insolúveis) da tolerância
The aim of this paper is to present three paradoxes involved in the notion of toleration and to analyze its possible solutions, using the results of this discussion to describe a possible fourth paradox, related to the value attributed to the toleration by the agents involved, which is considered as constitutive and therefore insoluble. For this, a structural notion of toleration as a moral ideal will be presented, discussing its elements. Then, from the relation with the specific components of this notion, the three paradoxes mentioned will be analyzed, two very well-known and a third little discussed and still without a name, and their possible solutions, that will require, respectively, the presentation of arguments in favor of toleration, the discussion of its limits and a demanding interpretation of the component of moral disapproval of that structure. Finally, starting from the discussion of the previous paradoxes and its solutions, a possible fourth paradox will be proposed, not explicitly formulated as such in these discussions, but whose constitutive elements have already been indicated since the eighteenth century, as well as the reasons for its insolubility.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信