{"title":"理解人,结构,欲望和我们自己","authors":"Felipe Morales","doi":"10.4067/s0717-554x2021000300183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Stephen Grimm defends the idea that for understanding people, we need to think of understanding not only in terms of grasp of structure (be that causal or of other kinds) but also in terms of a notion of understanding-as-taking-to-be-good. In this paper, I critically examine this idea. First, I argue that in some cases, understanding-as-taking-to-be-good can be explained in terms of understanding-as-grasp-of-structure. Then, I consider one further way in which understanding-as-taking-to-be-good could be obtained through something which is not a form of grasp of structure, which narrows and refines Grimm’s understanding-as-taking-to-be-good concept.","PeriodicalId":54112,"journal":{"name":"Cinta de Moebio","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On understanding people, structure, desires, and ourselves\",\"authors\":\"Felipe Morales\",\"doi\":\"10.4067/s0717-554x2021000300183\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Stephen Grimm defends the idea that for understanding people, we need to think of understanding not only in terms of grasp of structure (be that causal or of other kinds) but also in terms of a notion of understanding-as-taking-to-be-good. In this paper, I critically examine this idea. First, I argue that in some cases, understanding-as-taking-to-be-good can be explained in terms of understanding-as-grasp-of-structure. Then, I consider one further way in which understanding-as-taking-to-be-good could be obtained through something which is not a form of grasp of structure, which narrows and refines Grimm’s understanding-as-taking-to-be-good concept.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54112,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cinta de Moebio\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cinta de Moebio\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4067/s0717-554x2021000300183\",\"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":"Cinta de Moebio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4067/s0717-554x2021000300183","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
Stephen Grimm认为,要理解人,我们不仅要理解结构(不管是因果关系还是其他类型的结构)还要理解为善。在本文中,我批判性地考察了这一观点。首先,我认为,在某些情况下,理解为向善可以用理解为对结构的把握来解释。然后,我进一步考虑了一种方式,即通过非结构把握的形式获得理解为善,这缩小和完善了格林的理解为善概念。
On understanding people, structure, desires, and ourselves
Stephen Grimm defends the idea that for understanding people, we need to think of understanding not only in terms of grasp of structure (be that causal or of other kinds) but also in terms of a notion of understanding-as-taking-to-be-good. In this paper, I critically examine this idea. First, I argue that in some cases, understanding-as-taking-to-be-good can be explained in terms of understanding-as-grasp-of-structure. Then, I consider one further way in which understanding-as-taking-to-be-good could be obtained through something which is not a form of grasp of structure, which narrows and refines Grimm’s understanding-as-taking-to-be-good concept.
期刊介绍:
Cinta de Moebio publishes scientific articles and essays on epistemology of social science. The editorial experience of the magazine indicates that some academics send articles of philosophy, but of issues that are not related to the social sciences, as well as academics who sent the results of their research or projects in the social sciences, but its focus is not epistemology, which also are geared out to the purpose of the journal. The journal, put it in some way, it is in the dialogue of philosophy with social science and, therefore, both domains must be present in the articles.