Semantic Normativity and the Foundation of Ancient Ethics

2014 ◽  
pp. 425-466
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Detel
Keyword(s):  
Ancient Ethics ◽  
Semantic Normativity

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Konstan
Keyword(s):  
Interpersonal Relations ◽  
Classical Antiquity ◽  
Ancient Ethics ◽  
Other Regarding ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The City ◽  
The Way

This chapter examines the tension in classical thought between reciprocity and altruism as the two fundamental grounds of interpersonal relations within the city and, to a lesser extent, between citizens and foreigners. It summarizes the chapters that follow, and examines in particular the ideas of altruism and egoism and defends their application to ancient ethics. Various attempts to reconcile the two, especially in respect to Aristotle’s conception of virtue as other-regarding, are considered, and with the relationship to modern concepts of “egoism” and “altruism” is explored. The introduction concludes by noting that one of the premises of the book is that, in classical antiquity, love was deemed to play a larger role in the way people accounted for motivation in a number of domains, including friendship, loyalty, gratitude, grief, and civic harmony.

Eudaimonism and Cosmopolitan Concern

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David O. Brink
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
Ethical Concern ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Variable Weight ◽  
Ancient Ethics ◽  
The Common

This essay explores the adequacy of Sidgwick’s contrast between the egocentrism of ancient ethics and the impartiality of modern ethics by evaluating the resources of eudaimonists, especially Aristotle and the Stoics, to defend a cosmopolitan conception of the common good. Adapting ideas from Broad, we might contrast the scope and weight of ethical concern, distinguishing ethical conceptions that are parochial with respect to both scope and weight, conceptions that are cosmopolitan with respect to both scope and weight, and mixed conceptions that combine universal scope and variable weight. Aristotle’s conception of the common good appears doubly parochial. By contrast, the Stoic conception of the common good is purely cosmopolitan. But the Stoics have trouble providing a eudaimonist defense of their cosmopolitanism. However, Aristotelian eudaimonism has resources to justify a mixed conception. Mixed cosmopolitanism may be cosmopolitanism enough.

scholarly journals A Crítica da razão prática e o estoicismo

DoisPontos ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Valério Rohden
Keyword(s):  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
Practical Reason ◽  
Precise Determination ◽  
Ancient Ethics ◽  
The Subject

No presente trabalho será demonstrada a estreita, embora discreta, relação da filosofia moral de Kant com a ética antiga, especialmente com o estoicismo de Cícero. O tema será explicitado mediante uma aproximação entre as obras da Crítica da razão prática e Sobre os fins (De finibus), respectivamente de cada um desses autores. Será destacada a crítica de Kant à identificação entre virtude e felicidade e sua reformulação sintética no conceito de “sumo bem”. Na conclusão se torna claro que a realização moral da razão, reivindicada por Cícero, encontra na reformulação de Kant sua determinação mais precisa. The crises of practical reason and stoicism Abstract The present paper shows the close albeit subtle relation of Kant’s moral philosophy to ancient ethics, especially Cicero’s Stoicism. The subject is made explicit by means of a rapprochement between the Critique of practical reason and De finibus, so as to be highlight Kant’s criticism of the classical identifying of virtue and happiness and his synthetical recasting of the concept of the supreme good. The essay concludes by making clear that the moral actualization of reason, reclaimed by Cicero, finds in Kant’s reformulation its most precise determination.

Particularist semantic normativity

2006 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terry Horgan ◽  
Matjaž Potrč
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Normativity

The Normativity of Meaning Revisited

2019 ◽  
pp. 295-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans-Johann Glock
Keyword(s):  
Final Section ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Evolution Of Language ◽  
Different Dimensions ◽  
Correct Application ◽  
Linguistic Behaviour ◽  
Normativity Of Meaning ◽  
Semantic Normativity ◽  
And Linguistics ◽  
Normative Status

The question of whether meaning is inherently normative has become a central topic in philosophy and linguistics. It also has crucial implications for anthropology and for understanding the evolution of language. This chapter defends the normativity of meaning against some recent challenges. Anti-normativists contend that while there are “semantic principles”—aka explanations of meaning—specifying conditions for the correct application of expressions, these are either not genuinely normative or they are not in fact constitutive of meaning. This dilemma can be defused if one clarifies the notions of norm, rule, and convention, distinguishes different dimensions of semantic normativity, and pays attention to different types of mistakes that can afflict linguistic behaviour. One needs to keep apart: norms of truth and of meaning, regulative and constitutive rules, rules and the reasons for following or disregarding them, pro tanto and all things considered obligations. On that basis the chapter argues that correctness is a normative notion and that constitutive rules in general and explanations of meaning in particular play various normative roles in linguistic practices. Furthermore, while speakers may conform to and occasionally violate semantic principle for defeasible prudential reasons, this is perfectly compatible with the principles having a normative status. The final section discusses the question of whether human communication requires communally shared rules or conventions and the age-old problem of circularity: how could such conventions be essential to language, given that the latter appears prerequisite for establishing and communicating conventions in the first place?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document