伦理学的客观性与距离的相对性

Hannes Worthmann
{"title":"伦理学的客观性与距离的相对性","authors":"Hannes Worthmann","doi":"10.3196/004433024838386239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A rarely considered variety of objectivism in ethics takes the claim to objectivity of scientific and ethical judgments to be completely analogous. I show that this position is challenged by the socalled relativism of distance: Although we can make claims to objectivity in both areas,\n it is possible that agreement within each area extends to different degrees. A proper understanding of this challenge paves the way for us to make sense of two widely held assumptions: first, that there is objectivity in ethics, and second, that the claim to objectivity in ethics reaches a\n limit that the sciences can transcend.","PeriodicalId":296243,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung","volume":"15 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Objektivität in der Ethik und der Relativismus der Distanz\",\"authors\":\"Hannes Worthmann\",\"doi\":\"10.3196/004433024838386239\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A rarely considered variety of objectivism in ethics takes the claim to objectivity of scientific and ethical judgments to be completely analogous. I show that this position is challenged by the socalled relativism of distance: Although we can make claims to objectivity in both areas,\\n it is possible that agreement within each area extends to different degrees. A proper understanding of this challenge paves the way for us to make sense of two widely held assumptions: first, that there is objectivity in ethics, and second, that the claim to objectivity in ethics reaches a\\n limit that the sciences can transcend.\",\"PeriodicalId\":296243,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung\",\"volume\":\"15 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3196/004433024838386239\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3196/004433024838386239","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在伦理学中,有一种很少被考虑的客观主义认为,科学判断和伦理学判断的客观性是完全相似的。我的研究表明,这一立场受到了所谓的距离相对主义的挑战:尽管我们可以在这两个领域宣称客观性,但在每个领域内达成一致的程度可能是不同的。正确理解这一挑战为我们理解两个广为流传的假设铺平了道路:第一,伦理学存在客观性;第二,伦理学的客观性主张达到了科学可以超越的极限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Objektivität in der Ethik und der Relativismus der Distanz
A rarely considered variety of objectivism in ethics takes the claim to objectivity of scientific and ethical judgments to be completely analogous. I show that this position is challenged by the socalled relativism of distance: Although we can make claims to objectivity in both areas, it is possible that agreement within each area extends to different degrees. A proper understanding of this challenge paves the way for us to make sense of two widely held assumptions: first, that there is objectivity in ethics, and second, that the claim to objectivity in ethics reaches a limit that the sciences can transcend.
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