首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
文章检索
  按 检索   检索词:      
出版年份:   被引次数:   他引次数: 提示:输入*表示无穷大
  收费全文   62篇
  免费   3篇
  2021年   1篇
  2020年   2篇
  2019年   1篇
  2018年   4篇
  2017年   4篇
  2016年   1篇
  2015年   3篇
  2013年   5篇
  2012年   1篇
  2011年   1篇
  2010年   1篇
  2009年   5篇
  2008年   1篇
  2007年   5篇
  2006年   2篇
  2004年   1篇
  2003年   3篇
  2002年   3篇
  2001年   1篇
  2000年   2篇
  1999年   3篇
  1990年   1篇
  1987年   1篇
  1985年   3篇
  1984年   1篇
  1983年   1篇
  1982年   1篇
  1981年   1篇
  1980年   1篇
  1977年   1篇
  1976年   3篇
  1974年   1篇
排序方式: 共有65条查询结果,搜索用时 15 毫秒
61.
Summary  Following Mr. Bixby and some other 19th century scientist– philosophers such as Claude Bernard, relevant scientific actions should, as a matter of primary importance, be explained with reference to the competence and not to the intentions of those involved. The background is a reliabilist virtue approach – a widespread tendency in 19th century epistemology and philosophy of science. Bixby’s approach includes a critique of some constructivist arguments and establishes a mutually supportive connection to conceptions of scientific progress.  相似文献   
62.
Metaethicists typically develop and assess their theories—in part—on the basis of the consistency of those theories with “ordinary” first‐order normative judgment. They are, in this sense, “methodologically conservative.” This article shows that this methodologically conservative approach obstructs a proper assessment of the debate between internalists and externalists. Specifically, it obstructs one of the most promising readings of internalism. This is a reading—owed to Bernard Williams—in which internalism is part of a practically and politically motivated revision of the assessment of action. The article uses this case study to highlight the role of methodological conservatism in contemporary metaethics more generally.  相似文献   
63.
ABSTRACT

Building on Bernard Williams’ thesis about the intertwining of history and political philosophy, the essay explores how the problem of the history of dēmokratia after the late-eighteenth and over the nineteenth-century in Britain constituted a primary and critical field in which the philosophical meaning of democracy was debated. Configuring a new temporal perspective grounded in the relationship between ancient and modern democracy, historiographical works by John Gillies, William Mitford, and George Grote put forth an understanding of the concept as a battlefield, involving several conflicting meanings, narratives and historical forces. This historiographical tradition highlighted the tensions underpinning the definition of democracy in the long-term temporal frame linking antiquity and modernity. So even more than contemporary philosophical and political writings, historical understanding constituted a unique concept of democracy that both concentrated and dispersed meaning; it was not just one vision of democracy, among others, but one that acquired the paradoxical power to forge some semantic stability and coherence over time, and to accentuate the threat of the concept’s break up into distinct political premises and historical moments that constituted it.  相似文献   
64.
This essay responds to four critics of Friends and Other Strangers: Studies in Religion, Ethics and Culture: Diana Fritz Cates, Eric Gregory, Ross Moret, and Atalia Omer. Focusing on the book’s organizing concepts of intimacy and alterity, engagement with empirical sources, discussion of Augustine’s thought, and attention to moral psychology and political morality, these interlocutors take up various strands in the book’s argument and extend them into metaethical, normative, and metadisciplinary domains. The author organizes his response under three rubrics: Metaethics and Personal Relationships; Political Morality; and Multidisciplinary Horizons.  相似文献   
65.
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号