基于理性的尊重还是以种族为中心的包容?Avery Kolers、Richard Rorty和全球团结的动力

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Lee Michael Shults
{"title":"基于理性的尊重还是以种族为中心的包容?Avery Kolers、Richard Rorty和全球团结的动力","authors":"Lee Michael Shults","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2022.2138945","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article uses what Patti Tamara Lenard refers to as the cosmopolitan problem of motivation to discuss the roles of loyalty in two philosophical accounts of global solidarity. Avery Kolers’ Kantian, deontological approach to solidarity as reason-based deference is contrasted with Richard Rorty's controversial, anti-Kantian description of solidarity as ethnocentric inclusivity generated through sentimental education. This article offers critical reflections on the work of these two influential thinkers and combines elements of their theories to contribute a limited but useful response to Lenard's concerns regarding loyalty and the motivation of global solidarity.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reason-based deference or ethnocentric inclusivity? Avery Kolers, Richard Rorty, and the motivational force of global solidarity\",\"authors\":\"Lee Michael Shults\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17449626.2022.2138945\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article uses what Patti Tamara Lenard refers to as the cosmopolitan problem of motivation to discuss the roles of loyalty in two philosophical accounts of global solidarity. Avery Kolers’ Kantian, deontological approach to solidarity as reason-based deference is contrasted with Richard Rorty's controversial, anti-Kantian description of solidarity as ethnocentric inclusivity generated through sentimental education. This article offers critical reflections on the work of these two influential thinkers and combines elements of their theories to contribute a limited but useful response to Lenard's concerns regarding loyalty and the motivation of global solidarity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Global Ethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Global Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2022.2138945\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Global Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2022.2138945","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文运用派蒂·塔玛拉·莱纳德所说的世界性动机问题,讨论了忠诚在两种全球团结的哲学解释中的作用。艾弗里·科尔斯将团结视为基于理性的服从的康德式义务论方法与理查德·罗蒂将团结视为通过情感教育产生的种族中心主义包容性的有争议的反康德式描述形成对比。本文对这两位有影响力的思想家的作品进行了批判性的反思,并结合了他们的理论元素,对Lenard关于忠诚和全球团结动机的担忧做出了有限但有用的回应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reason-based deference or ethnocentric inclusivity? Avery Kolers, Richard Rorty, and the motivational force of global solidarity
ABSTRACT This article uses what Patti Tamara Lenard refers to as the cosmopolitan problem of motivation to discuss the roles of loyalty in two philosophical accounts of global solidarity. Avery Kolers’ Kantian, deontological approach to solidarity as reason-based deference is contrasted with Richard Rorty's controversial, anti-Kantian description of solidarity as ethnocentric inclusivity generated through sentimental education. This article offers critical reflections on the work of these two influential thinkers and combines elements of their theories to contribute a limited but useful response to Lenard's concerns regarding loyalty and the motivation of global solidarity.
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
Journal of Global Ethics
Journal of Global Ethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
×
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