Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Ethics --- Normativity (Ethics) --- Social ethics --- Social psychology

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This collection offers a synoptic view of current philosophical debates concerning the relationship between facts and values, bringing together a wide spectrum of contributors committed to testing the validity of this dichotomy, exploring alternatives, and assessing their implications. The assumption that facts and values inhabit distinct, unbridgeable conceptual and experiential domains has long dominated scientific and philosophical discourse, but this separation has been seriously called into question from a number of corners. The original essays here collected offer a diversity of responses to fact-value dichotomy, including contributions from Hilary Putnam and Ruth Anna Putnam who are rightly credited with revitalizing philosophical interest in this alleged opposition. Both they, and many of our contributors, are in agreement that the relationship between epistemic developments and evaluative attitudes cannot be framed as a conflict between descriptive and normative understanding. Each chapter demonstrates how and why contrapositions between science and ethics, between facts and values, and between objective and subjective are false dichotomies. Values cannot simply be separated from reason.

Normativity (Ethics) --- Norme (morale) --- Facts (Philosophy) --- Fait (philosophie) --- Values --- Valeurs (philosophie) --- Philosophy of science

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Les contributions de cet ouvrage traitent d'un sujet dont il n'est pas exagéré de dire qu'il constitue un véritable angle mort de la pensée juridique. C'est que le devoir n'a jamais fait l'objet d'une étude d'ensemble, quoique de remarquables travaux aient promu une approche plus sectorielle. Le devoir, conçu depuis Kant comme une notion de philosophie morale, n'a guère eu les faveurs de la doctrine qui le considère volontiers comme une simple source réelle du droit qui certes l'influence mais sans jamais - ou si peu - compter parmi ses concepts opératoires. En conséquence, le devoir peine à acquérir une véritable valeur technique ainsi qu'un régime juridique net. La pensée civiliste a souvent préféré consacrer ses recherches à l'obligation, de noblesse romaine, autour de laquelle s'articule le droit privé. La doctrine publiciste a quant à elle manifesté un grand intérêt pour les notions d'ordre public, de service public, de droits fondamentaux, laissant encore le devoir à l'écart de ses préoccupations. Les théoriciens du droit ont, quant à eux, d'abord concentré leurs efforts sur l'élucidation du concept de norme, puis celui de règle, laissant encore le devoir à la marge de leurs recherches. Et ce sont aujourd'hui les techniques modernes de régulation (le droit souple et ses avatars) opposées à toute idée de devoir qui sont au coeur des efforts les plus récents. C'est ce constat qui a poussé l'équipe d'accueil Marchés, Institutions, Libertés (MIL) de l'UPEC à centrer ses recherches sur le devoir, ce concept oublié, en le mettant en relation avec les notions qui charpentent utilement le droit positif (l'obligation, le contrat, les droits fondamentaux, la faute, etc.).

Obligations (Law) --- Law --- Duty --- Philosophy --- Normativity (Ethics) --- Norme (Morale) --- Obligations (Droit) --- Droit --- Devoir --- Philosophie

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Political ethics --- Normativity (Ethics) --- International cooperation --- International relations --- Moral and ethical aspects --- Political ethics - Case studies --- Normativity (Ethics) - Case studies --- International cooperation - Moral and ethical aspects - Case studies --- International relations - Moral and ethical aspects - Case studies

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Sometimes our intentions and beliefs exhibit a structure that proves us to be irrational. The Normativity of Rationality is concerned with the question of whether we ought to avoid such irrationality. Benjamin Kiesewetter defends the normativity of rationality by presenting a new solution to the problems that arise from the common assumption that we ought to be rational. The argument touches upon many other topics in the theory of normativity, such as the form and the content of rational requirements, the preconditions of criticism, and the function of reasons in deliberation and advice. Drawing on an extensive and careful assessment of the problems discussed in the literature, Kiesewetter provides a detailed defence of a reason-response conception of rationality, a novel, evidence-relative account of reasons, and an explanation of structural irrationality in terms of these accounts.

Reason --- Raison. --- Rationalism --- Rationalisme. --- Normativity (Ethics) --- Norme (morale) --- Philosophy of mind --- Philosophie de l'esprit. --- Theory of knowledge --- General ethics