康德在《道德形而上学奠基》第三章中试图从自由概念演绎出道德法则,然而他却同时指出,从自由到道德法则的推论中存在着一个“隐蔽的”循环,并花了不少篇幅来消除这个循环。本文指出,以卡尔,阿默里克斯(Karl Ameriks)和邓晓芒为代表的...康德在《道德形而上学奠基》第三章中试图从自由概念演绎出道德法则,然而他却同时指出,从自由到道德法则的推论中存在着一个“隐蔽的”循环,并花了不少篇幅来消除这个循环。本文指出,以卡尔,阿默里克斯(Karl Ameriks)和邓晓芒为代表的许多学者对这个循环的理解存在问题。实际上,康德这里并没有严格的循环,而仅仅由于在用自由说明道德法则的过程中,自由仅仅只是一个预设,而没有获得现实性,因此整个推论建立在并不可靠的基础上,由此出现所谓的“乞题错误”(begging the question),这与严格的循环论证是有区别的。按照这种对循环的理解,我们将更好地理解康德所做的“两个世界-三种观点”的区分是如何消除这个循环的。展开更多
The paper submits surprising results of systematical investigating a formal-ethical aspect of conjoining Wittgenstein＇s, Moore＇s, Parmenides＇, GSdel＇s, and Lukasiewicz＇s ideas. A critique of Wittgenstein＇s criti...The paper submits surprising results of systematical investigating a formal-ethical aspect of conjoining Wittgenstein＇s, Moore＇s, Parmenides＇, GSdel＇s, and Lukasiewicz＇s ideas. A critique of Wittgenstein＇s critique of the natural language of ethics and of metaphysics results in submitting and elaborating a new paradigm of metaphysics as formal axiology （in particular, formal ethics）. In result, the classical metaphysics and ethics of moral rigor are represented as two-valued algebraic systems of metaphysics and formal ethics respectively. By means of this algebraic model, all the well-known scandal-making metaphysical tenets of Parmenides are produced as translations of corresponding algebraic equations from the symbolic language to the natural one. At the level of submitted discrete mathematical model of formal axiology, Parmenides＇ metaphysical （formal-axiological） concepts ＂consistency＂ and ＂inconsistency,＂ ＂completeness＂ and ＂incompleteness＂ are compared with G^del＇s logic ones. Formal-axiological meanings of the words ＂consistency,＂ ＂incompleteness,＂ ＂being,＂ ＂nonbeing,＂ ＂movement,＂ ＂knowledge,＂ ＂belief,＂ etc., are considered as moral-evaluation-functions determined by one moral-evaluation-variable. Binary moral-evaluation-functions are studied as well. The functions are precisely defined by tables. Precise definitions of ＂formal-axiological-equivalence,＂ ＂formal-axiological-law,＂ and ＂formal-axiological contradiction＂ are submitted. Thus, one can either generate or examine formal-axiological equations of algebra of metaphysics by ＂computing＂ relevant compositions of moral-value-functions. Using this ＂moral-value-table-computation-technique,＂ one can arrive to a surprising conclusion that both the notorious sentence of Moore （called ＂epistemic paradox＂） and the incompleteness sentence of Godel are formally-axiologically inconsistent ones： Hence, they are formally-axiologically equivalent. For overcoming the negative psychological effect of such a surprising result, the author has used graphic models explicating the famous Lukasiewicz＇s statement ＂Logic is morality of thought and speech.＂展开更多
Moral generalism and particularism are two positions in meta-ethics which have different views regarding the relation between moral thought and principles. By accepting this relationship, generalists emphasize the nec...Moral generalism and particularism are two positions in meta-ethics which have different views regarding the relation between moral thought and principles. By accepting this relationship, generalists emphasize the necessity of principles in decision making process, and claim that the rationality of moral thought depends on the provision of a suitable supply ofmoral principles. In contrast, particularists have rejected, or at least doubted, the existence of moral principles, and believe that the rationality of moral thought depends on recognizing special features of a case and relevant conditions. This is why, unlike generalists, they use case study method rather than syllogism in decision making process and moral judgment. Consequently, to support their view, particularists commonly resort to holism in the theory of reasons, while atomism is in support of generalism. To evaluate these two attitudes, this study surveys some arguments that particularists and generalists proposed to justify their view and criticize the rival＇s one, and also explains their positions concerning the epistemological and metaphysical role of moral principles and reasons. Finally, after evaluating their claims, the importance of both approaches in meta-ethics is stressed.展开更多
文摘康德在《道德形而上学奠基》第三章中试图从自由概念演绎出道德法则,然而他却同时指出,从自由到道德法则的推论中存在着一个“隐蔽的”循环,并花了不少篇幅来消除这个循环。本文指出,以卡尔,阿默里克斯(Karl Ameriks)和邓晓芒为代表的许多学者对这个循环的理解存在问题。实际上,康德这里并没有严格的循环,而仅仅由于在用自由说明道德法则的过程中,自由仅仅只是一个预设,而没有获得现实性,因此整个推论建立在并不可靠的基础上,由此出现所谓的“乞题错误”(begging the question),这与严格的循环论证是有区别的。按照这种对循环的理解,我们将更好地理解康德所做的“两个世界-三种观点”的区分是如何消除这个循环的。
文摘The paper submits surprising results of systematical investigating a formal-ethical aspect of conjoining Wittgenstein＇s, Moore＇s, Parmenides＇, GSdel＇s, and Lukasiewicz＇s ideas. A critique of Wittgenstein＇s critique of the natural language of ethics and of metaphysics results in submitting and elaborating a new paradigm of metaphysics as formal axiology （in particular, formal ethics）. In result, the classical metaphysics and ethics of moral rigor are represented as two-valued algebraic systems of metaphysics and formal ethics respectively. By means of this algebraic model, all the well-known scandal-making metaphysical tenets of Parmenides are produced as translations of corresponding algebraic equations from the symbolic language to the natural one. At the level of submitted discrete mathematical model of formal axiology, Parmenides＇ metaphysical （formal-axiological） concepts ＂consistency＂ and ＂inconsistency,＂ ＂completeness＂ and ＂incompleteness＂ are compared with G^del＇s logic ones. Formal-axiological meanings of the words ＂consistency,＂ ＂incompleteness,＂ ＂being,＂ ＂nonbeing,＂ ＂movement,＂ ＂knowledge,＂ ＂belief,＂ etc., are considered as moral-evaluation-functions determined by one moral-evaluation-variable. Binary moral-evaluation-functions are studied as well. The functions are precisely defined by tables. Precise definitions of ＂formal-axiological-equivalence,＂ ＂formal-axiological-law,＂ and ＂formal-axiological contradiction＂ are submitted. Thus, one can either generate or examine formal-axiological equations of algebra of metaphysics by ＂computing＂ relevant compositions of moral-value-functions. Using this ＂moral-value-table-computation-technique,＂ one can arrive to a surprising conclusion that both the notorious sentence of Moore （called ＂epistemic paradox＂） and the incompleteness sentence of Godel are formally-axiologically inconsistent ones： Hence, they are formally-axiologically equivalent. For overcoming the negative psychological effect of such a surprising result, the author has used graphic models explicating the famous Lukasiewicz＇s statement ＂Logic is morality of thought and speech.＂
文摘Moral generalism and particularism are two positions in meta-ethics which have different views regarding the relation between moral thought and principles. By accepting this relationship, generalists emphasize the necessity of principles in decision making process, and claim that the rationality of moral thought depends on the provision of a suitable supply ofmoral principles. In contrast, particularists have rejected, or at least doubted, the existence of moral principles, and believe that the rationality of moral thought depends on recognizing special features of a case and relevant conditions. This is why, unlike generalists, they use case study method rather than syllogism in decision making process and moral judgment. Consequently, to support their view, particularists commonly resort to holism in the theory of reasons, while atomism is in support of generalism. To evaluate these two attitudes, this study surveys some arguments that particularists and generalists proposed to justify their view and criticize the rival＇s one, and also explains their positions concerning the epistemological and metaphysical role of moral principles and reasons. Finally, after evaluating their claims, the importance of both approaches in meta-ethics is stressed.
