关于不平等和暴力，以及我们在它们之间做出的区别

Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures Pub Date : 1974-03-01 DOI:10.1017/S0080443600001175

T. Honderich

{"title":"关于不平等和暴力，以及我们在它们之间做出的区别","authors":"T. Honderich","doi":"10.1017/S0080443600001175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Just about all political philosophy of the recommending kind is factless and presumptuous. That it has an honest intellectual use, which it does, and which of course is different from its use as reassurance and the like, is only to be explained by the want of something better.","PeriodicalId":322312,"journal":{"name":"Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1974-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Inequality and Violence, and the Differences we make between them\",\"authors\":\"T. Honderich\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0080443600001175\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Just about all political philosophy of the recommending kind is factless and presumptuous. That it has an honest intellectual use, which it does, and which of course is different from its use as reassurance and the like, is only to be explained by the want of something better.\",\"PeriodicalId\":322312,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1974-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0080443600001175\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0080443600001175","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

几乎所有推荐的政治哲学都是缺乏事实依据和自以为是的。它确实有一种诚实的智力用途，当然，这种用途不同于它作为安慰之类的用途，这只能解释为缺乏更好的东西。

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

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

On Inequality and Violence, and the Differences we make between them

Just about all political philosophy of the recommending kind is factless and presumptuous. That it has an honest intellectual use, which it does, and which of course is different from its use as reassurance and the like, is only to be explained by the want of something better.

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

Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊最新文献

Hume, Newton and ‘the Hill called Difficulty’ Hume as Moralist: a Social Historian's Perspective Diderot: Man and Society Kant and the Sincere Fanatic The Empiricism of Locke and Newton