对政治自由判断模型的贡献

IF 0.4 0 PHILOSOPHY Diametros Pub Date : 2019-11-09 DOI:10.33392/diam.1255
Urszula Lisowska
{"title":"对政治自由判断模型的贡献","authors":"Urszula Lisowska","doi":"10.33392/diam.1255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper intends to initiate a discussion on the politico-liberal concept of judgment. It is argued that whilst political liberalism (PL) – presented as an account of political objectivity – already appeals to judgment, this conception is an unsatisfactory one. This critical assessment is supported by the juxtaposition of PL with an Arendtian understanding of political objectivity which offers a more robust account of judgment. In the conclusion, the possibility of applying the Arendtian solution to PL is outlined.","PeriodicalId":42290,"journal":{"name":"Diametros","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Contribution to a Politico-Liberal Model of Judgment\",\"authors\":\"Urszula Lisowska\",\"doi\":\"10.33392/diam.1255\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper intends to initiate a discussion on the politico-liberal concept of judgment. It is argued that whilst political liberalism (PL) – presented as an account of political objectivity – already appeals to judgment, this conception is an unsatisfactory one. This critical assessment is supported by the juxtaposition of PL with an Arendtian understanding of political objectivity which offers a more robust account of judgment. In the conclusion, the possibility of applying the Arendtian solution to PL is outlined.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42290,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diametros\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diametros\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33392/diam.1255\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diametros","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33392/diam.1255","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文旨在对政治自由主义的判断概念展开讨论。有人认为,尽管政治自由主义(PL)——作为一种政治客观性的描述——已经吸引了人们的判断,但这一概念并不令人满意。这一批判性评估得到了PL与阿伦特对政治客观性的理解的并置的支持,后者为判断提供了更有力的解释。在结论中,概述了将阿伦特解应用于PL的可能性。
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
A Contribution to a Politico-Liberal Model of Judgment
The paper intends to initiate a discussion on the politico-liberal concept of judgment. It is argued that whilst political liberalism (PL) – presented as an account of political objectivity – already appeals to judgment, this conception is an unsatisfactory one. This critical assessment is supported by the juxtaposition of PL with an Arendtian understanding of political objectivity which offers a more robust account of judgment. In the conclusion, the possibility of applying the Arendtian solution to PL is outlined.
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
Diametros
Diametros PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
I Act Therefore I Live? Autopoiesis, Sensorimotor Autonomy, and Extended Agency Research ethics in a multilingual world: A guide to reflecting on language decisions in all disciplines Expertise and Expert Authority Ethical challenges in contemporary social research (editorial) Beyond the participant-researcher division: co-creating ethical relationships through care and rapport in studies of post-laryngectomy communication
×
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