好的(一些元素)

IF 0.2 0 PHILOSOPHY
G. Lodovici
{"title":"好的(一些元素)","authors":"G. Lodovici","doi":"10.4454/PHILINQ.V7I1.191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this essay is to reflect on the concept of the good, whose notion, albeit central not only in philosophy but also in various other fields, is not easy to semanticize. In what follows, at first the good is semanticized as a lovable and/or admirable and/or desirable entity; then the analysis moves on to the question of the status of moral properties. The present essay then proposes a differentiation between good and evil in the ontological and in the moral sense, also addressing the relationship between the ontological goods and good/evil acts. Finally, it is argued that there are some acts that are always evil but not acts that are always good.","PeriodicalId":41386,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical Inquiries","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Good (some Elements)\",\"authors\":\"G. Lodovici\",\"doi\":\"10.4454/PHILINQ.V7I1.191\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this essay is to reflect on the concept of the good, whose notion, albeit central not only in philosophy but also in various other fields, is not easy to semanticize. In what follows, at first the good is semanticized as a lovable and/or admirable and/or desirable entity; then the analysis moves on to the question of the status of moral properties. The present essay then proposes a differentiation between good and evil in the ontological and in the moral sense, also addressing the relationship between the ontological goods and good/evil acts. Finally, it is argued that there are some acts that are always evil but not acts that are always good.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41386,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophical Inquiries\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophical Inquiries\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4454/PHILINQ.V7I1.191\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophical Inquiries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4454/PHILINQ.V7I1.191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的目的是反思善的概念,尽管善的概念不仅在哲学上,而且在其他各个领域都很重要,但它并不容易被语义化。在接下来的内容中,善首先被语义化为可爱的和/或令人钦佩的和/或令人向往的实体;接着分析了道德属性的地位问题。然后,本文提出了本体论和道德意义上善与恶的区分,也解决了本体论上的善与善/恶行为之间的关系。最后,有人认为有些行为总是邪恶的,而不是总是好的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Good (some Elements)
The aim of this essay is to reflect on the concept of the good, whose notion, albeit central not only in philosophy but also in various other fields, is not easy to semanticize. In what follows, at first the good is semanticized as a lovable and/or admirable and/or desirable entity; then the analysis moves on to the question of the status of moral properties. The present essay then proposes a differentiation between good and evil in the ontological and in the moral sense, also addressing the relationship between the ontological goods and good/evil acts. Finally, it is argued that there are some acts that are always evil but not acts that are always good.
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
CiteScore
0.60
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