已颁布的赞赏和紧迫性的元规范结构

IF 1.1 1区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
ANALYSIS Pub Date : 2024-05-07 DOI:10.1093/analys/anad096
Elliot Porter
{"title":"已颁布的赞赏和紧迫性的元规范结构","authors":"Elliot Porter","doi":"10.1093/analys/anad096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Some considerations are urgent and others are not. Sometimes we invite criticism if we neglect the urgency of our situation, even if our action seems adequate to respond to it. Despite this significance, the literature does not offer a satisfactory analysis of the normative structure of urgency. I examine three views of urgency, drawn from philosophical and adjacent literature, which fail to explain the distinctive criticism we face when we neglect the urgency of our reasons. Instead I argue that urgent considerations pre-empt our deliberation about less urgent considerations. Urgency, then, is a meta-normative phenomenon, setting standards for how we handle and respond to first-order considerations, requiring that we close deliberation. In the face of urgency, appropriate action is not enough: commitment is called for. This is how we enact appreciation of our practical reasons, independently of our carrying out the action they call for.","PeriodicalId":47773,"journal":{"name":"ANALYSIS","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enacted appreciation and the meta-normative structure of urgency\",\"authors\":\"Elliot Porter\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/analys/anad096\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Some considerations are urgent and others are not. Sometimes we invite criticism if we neglect the urgency of our situation, even if our action seems adequate to respond to it. Despite this significance, the literature does not offer a satisfactory analysis of the normative structure of urgency. I examine three views of urgency, drawn from philosophical and adjacent literature, which fail to explain the distinctive criticism we face when we neglect the urgency of our reasons. Instead I argue that urgent considerations pre-empt our deliberation about less urgent considerations. Urgency, then, is a meta-normative phenomenon, setting standards for how we handle and respond to first-order considerations, requiring that we close deliberation. In the face of urgency, appropriate action is not enough: commitment is called for. This is how we enact appreciation of our practical reasons, independently of our carrying out the action they call for.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47773,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ANALYSIS\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ANALYSIS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/anad096\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ANALYSIS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/anad096","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有些考虑是紧迫的,有些则不是。有时,如果我们忽视了情况的紧迫性,即使我们的行动似乎足以应对这种情况,也会招致批评。尽管紧迫性具有重要意义,但文献并没有对紧迫性的规范结构进行令人满意的分析。我研究了哲学和邻近文献中关于紧迫性的三种观点,这些观点无法解释当我们忽视理由的紧迫性时所面临的独特批评。相反,我认为,紧迫性的考虑会先于我们对不那么紧迫的考虑进行审议。因此,紧迫性是一种元规范现象,它为我们如何处理和回应一阶考量设定了标准,要求我们结束商议。面对紧迫性,仅仅采取适当的行动是不够的,还需要做出承诺。这就是我们对实际理由的理解,与我们执行这些理由所要求的行动无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enacted appreciation and the meta-normative structure of urgency
Some considerations are urgent and others are not. Sometimes we invite criticism if we neglect the urgency of our situation, even if our action seems adequate to respond to it. Despite this significance, the literature does not offer a satisfactory analysis of the normative structure of urgency. I examine three views of urgency, drawn from philosophical and adjacent literature, which fail to explain the distinctive criticism we face when we neglect the urgency of our reasons. Instead I argue that urgent considerations pre-empt our deliberation about less urgent considerations. Urgency, then, is a meta-normative phenomenon, setting standards for how we handle and respond to first-order considerations, requiring that we close deliberation. In the face of urgency, appropriate action is not enough: commitment is called for. This is how we enact appreciation of our practical reasons, independently of our carrying out the action they call for.
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
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Analysis is the most established and esteemed forum in which to publish short discussions of topics in philosophy. Articles published in Analysis lend themselves to the presentation of cogent but brief arguments for substantive conclusions, and often give rise to discussions which continue over several interchanges. A wide range of topics are covered including: philosophical logic and philosophy of language, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of mind, and moral philosophy.
×
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