Constitutivism and Transcendental Practical Philosophy: How to Pull the Rabbit Out of the Hat.

Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel) Pub Date : 2016-01-01 Epub Date: 2016-09-16 DOI:10.1007/s11406-016-9746-3
Sorin Baiasu
{"title":"Constitutivism and Transcendental Practical Philosophy: How to Pull the Rabbit Out of the Hat.","authors":"Sorin Baiasu","doi":"10.1007/s11406-016-9746-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Constitutivism aims to justify substantial normative standards as constitutive of practical reason. In this way, it can defend the constructivist commitment to avoiding realism and anti-realism in normative disciplines. This metaphysical debate is the perspective from which the nature of the constitutivist justification is usually discussed. In this paper, I focus on a related, but distinct, debate. My concern will not be whether the substantial normative claims asserted by the constructivist have some elements, which are not constructed, but real, given independently from us; instead, my concern will be more narrowly epistemic - whether those claims can be derived from premises, which are normatively less substantial than the normative conclusions themselves. I focus on Korsgaard's transcendental articulation of the constitutivist argument. I conclude that more work would need to be done, in order for this argument to function as intended.</p>","PeriodicalId":74436,"journal":{"name":"Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel)","volume":"44 4","pages":"1185-1208"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11406-016-9746-3","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-016-9746-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/9/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Constitutivism aims to justify substantial normative standards as constitutive of practical reason. In this way, it can defend the constructivist commitment to avoiding realism and anti-realism in normative disciplines. This metaphysical debate is the perspective from which the nature of the constitutivist justification is usually discussed. In this paper, I focus on a related, but distinct, debate. My concern will not be whether the substantial normative claims asserted by the constructivist have some elements, which are not constructed, but real, given independently from us; instead, my concern will be more narrowly epistemic - whether those claims can be derived from premises, which are normatively less substantial than the normative conclusions themselves. I focus on Korsgaard's transcendental articulation of the constitutivist argument. I conclude that more work would need to be done, in order for this argument to function as intended.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
建构主义与先验实践哲学:如何从帽子里拉出兔子。
建构主义旨在证明实质的规范性标准构成了实践理性。通过这种方式,它可以捍卫建构主义在规范学科中避免现实主义和反现实主义的承诺。这种形而上学的争论是通常讨论构成主义正当性的视角。在本文中,我将关注一个相关但不同的争论。我所关心的不是建构主义者所断言的实质性规范主张是否具有某些元素,这些元素不是被建构出来的,而是真实的,独立于我们而给予的;相反,我关注的将是更狭义的认知论——这些主张是否可以从前提中推导出来,而前提在规范性上不如规范性结论本身那么重要。我关注的是科斯加德对建构主义论证的先验阐释。我的结论是,为了使这一论点发挥预期的作用,还需要做更多的工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
How AI Systems Can Be Blameworthy. W. Matthews Grant's Dual Sources Account and Ultimate Responsibility. Taxation in the COVID-19 Pandemic: to Pay or Not to Pay. The Value of Knowledge and Other Epistemic Standings: A Case for Epistemic Pluralism. The Conditional Analysis of the Agentive Modals: a Reply to Mandelkern et al.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1