Narrow search

By category:

By publication type:

By language:

By journals:

By document type:

Displaying: 21-30 of 865 documents

0.054 sec

21. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 16
Edmund N. Santurri Response to Langan’s “Egoism and Morality in the Theological Teleology of Thomas Aquinas”
22. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 16
Eric Russert Kraemer On The Moral Twin-Earth Challenge to New-Wave Moral Realism
23. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 16
Phillip H. Wiebe Existential Assumptions for Aristotelian Logic
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This paper addresses the question of what existential assumptions are needed for the Aristotelian interpretation of the relationships between the four categorical propositions. The particular relationships in question are those unique to the Aristotelian logic, namely, contrariety, subcontrariety, subaltemation, conversion by limitation, and contraposition by limitation. The views of several recent authors of logic textbooks are surveyed. While most construe the Aristotelian logic as capable of being preserved by assuming that the subject class has a member, Irving Copi construes that logic as requiring that four assumptions about class membership be made. These are that the subject, predicate, complement of subject, and complement of predicate classes all have members. It is argued that only three assumptions about class membership are needed, viz., that subject, predicate, and complement of predicate classes have members.
24. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 16
Saul Smilansky The Contrariety of Combatibilist Positions
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The compatibilist position on the free will problem tends to be perceived as clear, rather unitary and consistent even by those who oppose it. This notion is mistaken, and is harmful to the recognition of the weaknesses and strengths of compatibilism. By examining the three main compatibilist positions and their interrelationships, I attempt to see whether compatibilists can continue to hold together the different positions; and if they cannot, which position they should remain with. The conclusions reached are that compatibilists ought to opt for one (‘control’) type of compatibilism, but that compatibilism is only partially convincing.
25. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 16
Gregory Fried Heidegger’s “Polemos”
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Despite the rekindling of an often bitter debate as to the meaning of Martin Heidegger’s involvement with National Socialism, little has been done to address afresh the texts themselves of the period in question and the problematic to which Heidegger conceived he was applying himself. Defying Enlightenment universalism, Heidegger asserts that meaningful human existence requires a belonging in a particular historical community whose integrity must be sustained in what he calls “Auseinandersetzung,”---confrontation. This paper attempts to show how “Auseinandersetzung,” itself Heidegger’s translation of the Greek word “polemos,” underlies central concepts of Heidegger”s ontology, influencing his views on work, art, and great creators. The current controversy lends us an opportunity to reflect on the meaning of fascism and the foundation for politics in a global era.
26. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 16
Alfred R. Mele Incontinent Belief: A Rejoinder
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
Brian McLaughlin, in “Incontinent Belief” (Journal of Philosophical Research 15 [1989-90] , pp. 115-26), takes issue with my investigation, in lrrationality (Oxford University Press, 1987), of a doxastic analogue of akratic action. He deems what I term “strict akratic belief” philosophically uninteresting. In the present paper, I explain that this assessment rests on a serious confusion about the sort of possibility that is at issue in my chapter on the topic, correct a variety of misimpressions, and rebut McLaughlin’s arguments as they apply to the psychological possibility of strict akratic belief and to the etiology of beliefs generally.
27. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 16
Judith Andre The Demands of Deontology Are Not So Paradoxical
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
The “paradox of deontology” depends partly upon ignoring the special responsibility each person has for her own actions, and partly upon ignoring the essential differences between refraining from X and persuading another to refrain. But only in part; the paradoxical situations schematized by Shaw can occasionally occur. When they do, his pragmatic defense of deontology is sound.
28. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 16
Wayne Wasserman, Charles Sayward Nagel, Internalism, and Relativism
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
In this paper we (1) give a new interpretation to Thomas Nagel’s The Possibility of Altruism, and (2) use that account to show how internalism and anti-relativism are compatible, despite appearances to the contrary.
29. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 16
Suzanne Cunningham A Darwinian Approach to Functionalism
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
I argue against the claim of certain functionalists, like Jerry Fodor, that theories of psychological states ought to abstract from the physiology of the systems that exhibit such states. Taking seriously Darwin’s claim that living organisms struggle to survive, and that their “mental powers” are adaptations that assist them in this struggle, I argue that not only emotions but also paradigm cognitive states like beliefs are intimately bound up with the physiology of the organism and its efforts to maintain its own well-being. I defend the definitional aspirations of functionalism but reject its attempt at ontological neutrality.
30. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 16
Thomas W. Satre Human Dignity and Capital Punishment
abstract | view |  rights & permissions
This paper reviews the concept of human dignity as it has evolved in recent decisions by the United States Supreme Court, and the paper then sketches a “rights based” theory of human dignity. Among the principles of human dignity is a principle of compensation for mistakes in the treatment of any person. A broad concept of mistake is outlined, and, in terms of this concept and the principles of dignity, the practice of capital punishment is examined. An argument by Jeffrie Murphy against capital punishment is stated and criticized and a stronger argument against capital punishment is presented.