{"title":"对付达沃尔","authors":"R. Stern","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198829027.003.0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter contrasts Løgstrup’s position with the account of moral obligation offered by Stephen Darwall, which bases obligation on second-personal authority. The chapter begins by setting out Darwall’s position (§10.1). It then focuses on three respects in which he could seem to claim an advantage over Løgstrup: namely, in the way he links obligations to rights; in the place he gives to respect for autonomy in his account; and in the greater explanatory resources he has available to make sense of the idea of moral obligation (§10.2). The chapter then considers responses that Løgstrup might give to these challenges (§10.3), arguing that Løgstrup’s objection to the command account of obligation is also telling against Darwall.","PeriodicalId":184927,"journal":{"name":"The Radical Demand in Løgstrup's Ethics","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dealing with Darwall\",\"authors\":\"R. Stern\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OSO/9780198829027.003.0010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter contrasts Løgstrup’s position with the account of moral obligation offered by Stephen Darwall, which bases obligation on second-personal authority. The chapter begins by setting out Darwall’s position (§10.1). It then focuses on three respects in which he could seem to claim an advantage over Løgstrup: namely, in the way he links obligations to rights; in the place he gives to respect for autonomy in his account; and in the greater explanatory resources he has available to make sense of the idea of moral obligation (§10.2). The chapter then considers responses that Løgstrup might give to these challenges (§10.3), arguing that Løgstrup’s objection to the command account of obligation is also telling against Darwall.\",\"PeriodicalId\":184927,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Radical Demand in Løgstrup's Ethics\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Radical Demand in Løgstrup's Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198829027.003.0010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Radical Demand in Løgstrup's Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198829027.003.0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章将洛格鲁普的立场与斯蒂芬·达沃尔的道德义务论进行了对比,后者将义务建立在第二个人权威的基础上。本章首先阐述了达沃尔的立场(第10.1节)。然后,它集中在三个方面,他似乎可以声称优于Løgstrup:即,他将义务与权利联系起来的方式;在他的账上,他尊重自主;在更广泛的解释资源中,他可以理解道德义务的概念(§10.2)。然后,本章考虑了Løgstrup可能对这些挑战做出的回应(§10.3),认为Løgstrup对义务的命令叙述的反对也对达尔沃尔不利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Dealing with Darwall
This chapter contrasts Løgstrup’s position with the account of moral obligation offered by Stephen Darwall, which bases obligation on second-personal authority. The chapter begins by setting out Darwall’s position (§10.1). It then focuses on three respects in which he could seem to claim an advantage over Løgstrup: namely, in the way he links obligations to rights; in the place he gives to respect for autonomy in his account; and in the greater explanatory resources he has available to make sense of the idea of moral obligation (§10.2). The chapter then considers responses that Løgstrup might give to these challenges (§10.3), arguing that Løgstrup’s objection to the command account of obligation is also telling against Darwall.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Learning from Luther Dealing with Darwall Ethics, Science, and Poetry The Ethical Demand and Its Basis Forgiveness and the Limits of Ethics
×
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