ログイン
言語:

WEKO3

  • トップ
  • ランキング
To
lat lon distance
To

Field does not validate



インデックスリンク

インデックスツリー

メールアドレスを入力してください。

WEKO

One fine body…

WEKO

One fine body…

アイテム

  1. 広島大学の刊行物
  2. 比較論理学研究
  3. 16号

アリストテレスの倫理学の自然学への依存関係についての論点

https://doi.org/10.15027/47669
https://doi.org/10.15027/47669
ed3e465f-d2b9-4d8e-8fed-408303430737
名前 / ファイル ライセンス アクション
Ann-ResProjCent-CompStudLogic_16_5.pdf Ann-ResProjCent-CompStudLogic_16_5.pdf (231.0 KB)
Item type デフォルトアイテムタイプ_(フル)(1)
公開日 2023-03-18
タイトル
タイトル アリストテレスの倫理学の自然学への依存関係についての論点
言語 ja
タイトル
タイトル On the Dependence of Aristotle’s Ethics on the Natural Sciences
言語 en
作成者 高橋, 祥吾

× 高橋, 祥吾

ja 高橋, 祥吾

en Takahashi, Shogo

Search repository
アクセス権
アクセス権 open access
アクセス権URI http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
内容記述
内容記述 This paper is a survey on the dependence of Aristotle’s ethics on the natural sciences. Naturalism in Aristotle’s ethics has two issues, which are found in modern meta-ethics. The first one is whether ethical concepts and things have objectivity or not. The second is whether ethics is depend on natural science or not. Several scholars have presented some interpretations of these two issues. With respect to the first issue, neo-Aristotelian Naturalists interpret that it is possible to explain ‘happiness’ and ‘goodness’ from human nature, and that human nature gives objectivity to these concepts. With respect to the second issue, they think that Aristotle’s ethics is an autonomous discipline, that is, his ethics is independent of his natural science. On the other hand, the opponents to neo-Aristotelian Naturalism do not necessarily disagree with neo-Aristotelian Naturalism in terms of the first issue. However, they oppose the idea that Aristotle’s ethics is independent of his natural science. Shields states that the function argument in Nicomachean Ethics I 7 implicitly assumes the specialized psychological knowledge in De anima. Leunissen states that Aristotle does not require that students of ethics (or political science) are familiar with the rudimentary knowledge of natural science, but rather that they are educated for the specialized knowledge on his natural (biological) science. It is the ambiguity of Aristotle’s own explanation that neo-Aristotelian Naturalists and their opponents disagree with regards to the second issue. Aristotle clearly distinguishes between practical and theoretical knowledge. On the other hand, he also seems to say that in order to understand ethics we need to possess knowledge of natural science, which does not need to be strict enough to know the principles of natural science. It is ambiguous whether the knowledge which Aristotle expects us to acquire is a rudimentary or a specialized one. Therefore, opinions of scholars also disagree as to whether his ethics depends on his natural science. The author speculates that Aristotle’s ethics depends partly on natural science. Because, in Rhetoric, Aristotle seems to think that the rhetorical reasoning which is related to political science uses a premise of natural science.
言語 en
内容記述
内容記述タイプ Other
内容記述 広島大学比較論理学プロジェクト研究センター研究成果報告書(2018年度)
内容記述
内容記述タイプ Other
内容記述 本稿は,文部科学省科学研究費補助金「アリストテレス倫理学の再定位を通した新たな自然主義的倫理学の構想」17H02257の助成の成果の一部である.
出版者
出版者 広島大学比較論理学プロジェクト研究センター
言語
言語 jpn
資源タイプ
資源タイプ識別子 http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
資源タイプ departmental bulletin paper
出版タイプ
出版タイプ VoR
出版タイプResource http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
ID登録
ID登録 10.15027/47669
ID登録タイプ JaLC
収録物識別子
収録物識別子タイプ ISSN
収録物識別子 1880-6376
収録物識別子
収録物識別子タイプ NCID
収録物識別子 AA12025285
開始ページ
開始ページ 5
書誌情報 比較論理学研究
The Annals of the Research Project Center for the Comparative Study of Logic

号 16, p. 5-12, 発行日 2019-03-25
旧ID 47669
戻る
0
views
See details
Views

Versions

Ver.1 2025-03-01 07:01:35.444850
Show All versions

Share

Mendeley Twitter Facebook Print Addthis

Cite as

エクスポート

OAI-PMH
  • OAI-PMH JPCOAR 2.0
  • OAI-PMH JPCOAR 1.0
  • OAI-PMH DublinCore
  • OAI-PMH DDI
Other Formats
  • JSON
  • BIBTEX

Confirm


Powered by WEKO3


Powered by WEKO3