道德主观主义与分歧语义学

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Filosofia Unisinos Pub Date : 2023-12-05 DOI:10.4013/fsu.2023.243.09
Vitor Sommavilla
{"title":"道德主观主义与分歧语义学","authors":"Vitor Sommavilla","doi":"10.4013/fsu.2023.243.09","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I discuss which semantic theory moral subjectivists should adopt. Moral subjectivism is understood broadly to include all theories according to which moral sentences are truth-apt, at least sometimes true, and made true by the mental attitudes of certain relevant agent or set of agents. Due to the breadth of this definition, an initial concern is whether a unified semantic approach is able to accommodate all varieties of subjectivism. I argue that it is. I then proceed to analyse the main semantic theories for moral sentences as they apply to the standard issue of moral disagreements. I conclude in favour of so-called Non-Indexical Contextualism.","PeriodicalId":41989,"journal":{"name":"Filosofia Unisinos","volume":"51 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Moral subjectivism and the semantics of disagreements\",\"authors\":\"Vitor Sommavilla\",\"doi\":\"10.4013/fsu.2023.243.09\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper, I discuss which semantic theory moral subjectivists should adopt. Moral subjectivism is understood broadly to include all theories according to which moral sentences are truth-apt, at least sometimes true, and made true by the mental attitudes of certain relevant agent or set of agents. Due to the breadth of this definition, an initial concern is whether a unified semantic approach is able to accommodate all varieties of subjectivism. I argue that it is. I then proceed to analyse the main semantic theories for moral sentences as they apply to the standard issue of moral disagreements. I conclude in favour of so-called Non-Indexical Contextualism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Filosofia Unisinos\",\"volume\":\"51 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Filosofia Unisinos\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4013/fsu.2023.243.09\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filosofia Unisinos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4013/fsu.2023.243.09","RegionNum":4,"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

摘要

本文讨论了道德主观主义者应该采用何种语义理论。道德主观主义被广泛地理解为包括所有理论,根据这些理论,道德句子是倾向于真理的,至少有时是真的,并且是由某些相关主体或一组主体的心理态度实现的。由于这一定义的广度,人们首先关心的是,统一的语义方法是否能够容纳所有种类的主观主义。我认为是的。然后,我继续分析道德句子的主要语义理论,因为它们适用于道德分歧的标准问题。最后,我赞成所谓的非索引语境主义。
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
Moral subjectivism and the semantics of disagreements
In this paper, I discuss which semantic theory moral subjectivists should adopt. Moral subjectivism is understood broadly to include all theories according to which moral sentences are truth-apt, at least sometimes true, and made true by the mental attitudes of certain relevant agent or set of agents. Due to the breadth of this definition, an initial concern is whether a unified semantic approach is able to accommodate all varieties of subjectivism. I argue that it is. I then proceed to analyse the main semantic theories for moral sentences as they apply to the standard issue of moral disagreements. I conclude in favour of so-called Non-Indexical Contextualism.
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
Filosofia Unisinos
Filosofia Unisinos PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊最新文献
O republicanismo neorromano na concepção de liberdade de J. S. Mill Preceitos e consequências da unificação de lógica e metafísica por Hegel: A desobediência civil como um direito de defesa em Rawls e uma tentativa de resposta à crítica de Raz Verdade e Justiça em Emmanuel Levinas Uma avaliação crítica da implausibilidade teórica do socioconstrutivismo
×
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