Personal and Objective Ethics: How to Read the Crito

IF 0.8 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY PHILOSOPHY Pub Date : 2021-10-08 DOI:10.1017/S0031819121000358
H. Ohtani
{"title":"Personal and Objective Ethics: How to Read the Crito","authors":"H. Ohtani","doi":"10.1017/S0031819121000358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Dominant interpretations of Plato's Crito attempt to reconstruct the text deductively, taking the arguments in the famous Laws’ speech as consisting solely in the application of general principles to facts. It is thus conceived that the principles and facts are grasped independently of each other, and then the former are applied to the latter, subsequently reaching the conclusion that Socrates must not escape. Following the lead of Cora Diamond, who argues against this ‘generalist interpretation’, I argue that the Laws’ speech essentially involves an exercise of our moral imagination through which both principles and the facts to which they apply are grasped. This is not to say that a deductive argument is absent from the Laws’ speech. Rather, for the first time, we understand how the deductive arguments in the Laws’ speech can function through imagining a life in which these arguments make sense. The Crito is an attempt to exercise the readers’ imagination, thereby presenting ethics that is both personal and objective. Understanding the Laws’ arguments essentially requires the readers’ imaginative involvement with Socrates’ personal story, but they still have objective import.","PeriodicalId":54197,"journal":{"name":"PHILOSOPHY","volume":"97 1","pages":"91 - 114"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819121000358","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Dominant interpretations of Plato's Crito attempt to reconstruct the text deductively, taking the arguments in the famous Laws’ speech as consisting solely in the application of general principles to facts. It is thus conceived that the principles and facts are grasped independently of each other, and then the former are applied to the latter, subsequently reaching the conclusion that Socrates must not escape. Following the lead of Cora Diamond, who argues against this ‘generalist interpretation’, I argue that the Laws’ speech essentially involves an exercise of our moral imagination through which both principles and the facts to which they apply are grasped. This is not to say that a deductive argument is absent from the Laws’ speech. Rather, for the first time, we understand how the deductive arguments in the Laws’ speech can function through imagining a life in which these arguments make sense. The Crito is an attempt to exercise the readers’ imagination, thereby presenting ethics that is both personal and objective. Understanding the Laws’ arguments essentially requires the readers’ imaginative involvement with Socrates’ personal story, but they still have objective import.
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
个人与客观伦理学:如何解读克里托
对柏拉图《克里托篇》的主流解释试图以演绎的方式重构文本,把著名的《律法》演讲中的论点仅仅看作是一般原则对事实的应用。因此,人们认为原则和事实是彼此独立地掌握的,然后前者应用于后者,从而得出苏格拉底不能逃避的结论。在反对这种“通才解释”的科拉·戴蒙德(Cora Diamond)的领导下,我认为,《法律》的演讲本质上涉及到我们对道德想象力的运用,通过这种想象,原则和它们所适用的事实都得到了把握。这并不是说劳斯的演讲中没有演绎论证。相反,我们第一次理解了劳斯演讲中的演绎论点是如何通过想象这些论点有意义的生活来发挥作用的。《克里托篇》试图运用读者的想象力,从而呈现出既个人化又客观的伦理学。理解《律法》的论点本质上需要读者对苏格拉底个人故事的想象参与,但它们仍然具有客观的重要性。
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
PHILOSOPHY
PHILOSOPHY PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Philosophy is the journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy, which was founded in 1925 to build bridges between specialist philosophers and a wider educated public. The journal continues to fulfil a dual role: it is one of the leading academic journals of philosophy, but it also serves the philosophical interests of specialists in other fields (law, language, literature and the arts, medicine, politics, religion, science, education, psychology, history) and those of the informed general reader. Contributors are required to avoid needless technicality of language and presentation. The institutional subscription includes two supplements.
期刊最新文献
Dark Futures: Toward a Philosophical Archaeology of Hope Mobility, Migration, and Mobile Migration Feeling Responsible: On Regret for Others’ Harms Being Open-Minded about Open-Mindedness P.F. Strawson on Punishment and the Hypothesis of Symbolic Retribution
×
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