进化与文化直觉。关于我们公平感起源的高度推测性评论

Rodrigo Braicovich
{"title":"进化与文化直觉。关于我们公平感起源的高度推测性评论","authors":"Rodrigo Braicovich","doi":"10.14201/art2024.31231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\nThe question of whether the sense of fairness constitutes an exclusively human trait has been answered mostly from two polar positions: the first one unambiguously affirms such exclusivity, thus denying the relevance of cognitive ethology to understand our evaluations of justice; the second one, on the contrary, postulates the existence of a (proto) sense of fairness in non-human animals, strongly related to ours, which would make cognitive ethology highly relevant to understand the mechanisms on which our evaluative practices are based. From a position of extreme caution in relation to the possibility of (eventually) offering concrete evidence in favor of innatist theses such as the one I will defend here, I will suggest that i) in line with the rupturist positions, it is possible to preserve the human exclusivity of the sense of justice, ii) in line with the continuist positions, the relevance of studies coming from cognitive ethology is guaranteed, insofar as (ex hypotesi) our evaluative practices often take as input innate psychological dispositions shared with other species. Finally, I will suggest that the concept of rationalization is central to determine in each case the possible articulation between innate dispositions and explicit justifications.\n","PeriodicalId":259984,"journal":{"name":"ArtefaCToS. Revista de estudios sobre la ciencia y la tecnología","volume":"11 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evolved and Cultural Intuitions. Highly Speculative Remarks on the Origins of our Sense of Fairness\",\"authors\":\"Rodrigo Braicovich\",\"doi\":\"10.14201/art2024.31231\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n\\nThe question of whether the sense of fairness constitutes an exclusively human trait has been answered mostly from two polar positions: the first one unambiguously affirms such exclusivity, thus denying the relevance of cognitive ethology to understand our evaluations of justice; the second one, on the contrary, postulates the existence of a (proto) sense of fairness in non-human animals, strongly related to ours, which would make cognitive ethology highly relevant to understand the mechanisms on which our evaluative practices are based. From a position of extreme caution in relation to the possibility of (eventually) offering concrete evidence in favor of innatist theses such as the one I will defend here, I will suggest that i) in line with the rupturist positions, it is possible to preserve the human exclusivity of the sense of justice, ii) in line with the continuist positions, the relevance of studies coming from cognitive ethology is guaranteed, insofar as (ex hypotesi) our evaluative practices often take as input innate psychological dispositions shared with other species. Finally, I will suggest that the concept of rationalization is central to determine in each case the possible articulation between innate dispositions and explicit justifications.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":259984,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ArtefaCToS. Revista de estudios sobre la ciencia y la tecnología\",\"volume\":\"11 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ArtefaCToS. Revista de estudios sobre la ciencia y la tecnología\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14201/art2024.31231\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ArtefaCToS. Revista de estudios sobre la ciencia y la tecnología","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14201/art2024.31231","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

对于公平感是否是人类独有的特质这一问题,人们主要从两个极端的立场来回答:第一种立场明确肯定了这种独有性,从而否定了认知伦理学对理解我们的正义评价的意义;第二种立场则相反,假设在非人类动物中存在一种(原生的)公平感,与我们的公平感密切相关,这将使认知伦理学对理解我们的评价实践所依据的机制具有高度的相关性。对于能否(最终)提供支持先天论的具体证据(比如我在这里要捍卫的论点),我持极为谨慎的态度,我将建议:i) 与断裂论的立场一致,有可能保留人类对公平感的排他性;ii) 与连续论的立场一致,认知伦理学研究的相关性是有保证的,只要(前引)我们的评价实践经常将与其他物种共享的先天心理倾向作为输入。最后,我将提出,合理化的概念对于确定每种情况下先天倾向与明确理由之间可能的衔接至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evolved and Cultural Intuitions. Highly Speculative Remarks on the Origins of our Sense of Fairness
The question of whether the sense of fairness constitutes an exclusively human trait has been answered mostly from two polar positions: the first one unambiguously affirms such exclusivity, thus denying the relevance of cognitive ethology to understand our evaluations of justice; the second one, on the contrary, postulates the existence of a (proto) sense of fairness in non-human animals, strongly related to ours, which would make cognitive ethology highly relevant to understand the mechanisms on which our evaluative practices are based. From a position of extreme caution in relation to the possibility of (eventually) offering concrete evidence in favor of innatist theses such as the one I will defend here, I will suggest that i) in line with the rupturist positions, it is possible to preserve the human exclusivity of the sense of justice, ii) in line with the continuist positions, the relevance of studies coming from cognitive ethology is guaranteed, insofar as (ex hypotesi) our evaluative practices often take as input innate psychological dispositions shared with other species. Finally, I will suggest that the concept of rationalization is central to determine in each case the possible articulation between innate dispositions and explicit justifications.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信