Fred Feldman Gönderileri
Fred Feldman kitaplarını, Fred Feldman sözleri ve alıntılarını, Fred Feldman yazarlarını, Fred Feldman yorumları ve incelemelerini 1000Kitap'ta bulabilirsiniz.
There is a crucial difference between SN and WM. According to SN, moral sentences have truth values. According to WM, they do not. This follows from the fact that according to WM, each moral sentence has two meaning components. One component is factual. It is the assertion that the speaker has a certain attitude. This part has a truth value. But the other component is a command. Commands are neither true nor false.
Sayfa 224 - the differences bw subjective naturalism ve stevenson's working modelKitabı okudu
for example, the sentence “Pain is bad” could not be used to assert anything. It could only be used expressively or imperativally. Consequently, it would seem that no one could Objections to know, or even believe, that pain is bad. For there simply is no such thing as the “fact” that pain is bad, according to radical emotivism. Thus, emotivism entails that there can be no “moral knowledge.” For this reason, emotivism is sometimes classified as a form of noncognitivism.
Sayfa 218 - kısaca radical emotivism:Kitabı okudu
moral judgments are closely associated with positive and negative feelings, or emotions.
Sayfa 212 - the definition of emotivismKitabı okudu
Moore’s main thesis in Principia Ethica is that goodness is an unanalyzable, nonnatural property. Put linguistically, this thesis is the view that “good” cannot be defined, and is not synonymous with any naturalistic expression.
Sayfa 203 - moore'un metaetiğiKitabı okudu
(1) Something is good if and only if it is--------.
(2) Therefore, x is good =df. x is--------.
If naturalists use arguments of this form, in each case putting some naturalistic expression in the blank, then they argue fallaciously. For arguments of the illustrated form are not in general valid.
Sayfa 196 - if and only if statementları geçersiz morality içinde. çünkü çok genel, yani bir şey hem güzel hem de tek bir koşula bağlı olmayabilir.Kitabı okudu
Moore seems to be attempting to show that naturalists have not given us any good reason to accept their view. Somewhere in each naturalist’s thinking, there is an error that leads him to accept naturalism. This mistake is called the naturalistic fallacy. However, even if naturalists were to admit that they have not proved their view to be true, thev might still claim that it is true anyway. So in the second stage of his attack, Moore attempts to show that every form of naturalism is false.
Sayfa 193 - moore'un naturalisme bakış açısıKitabı okudu
No single work of twentieth-century metaethics has been more influential than G. E. Moore’s Principia Ethica.
Sayfa 193 - principia ethicanın önemiKitabı okudu
suppose we want to discuss some complicated feature of actions and there simply is no single word in the English language that expresses this feature. In such a case, we can introduce a new word and stipulate that it shall henceforward be used to express the complicated feature we want to talk about. A good example of this sort of procedure is the definition of “utility” that was presented in Chapter 2. We were interested in the amount of pleasure, minus the amount of pain, that a given act would produce if it were performed. We wanted a simple expression that would refer to this amount. So we introduced a stipulative definition of “utility.”
Sayfa 175 - what the stipulative definition isKitabı okudu
FİKİR KİTAPLARI ETKİNLİK 1
