排序方式: 共有4条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1
1.
Owen Hulatt 《International Journal of Philosophical Studies》2013,21(5):676-695
AbstractAdorno’s commitment to anti-foundationalism generates a concern over how his ethically normative appraisals of social phenomena can be founded. Drawing on both Kohlmann and Bernstein’s account, I produce a new reading which contends somatic impulses are capable of bearing intrinsically normative epistemic and moral content. This entails a new way of understanding Adorno’s contention that Auschwitz produced a new categorical imperative. Working with Bernstein’s account, I claim that Auschwitz makes manifest the hostility of the instrumentalization of reason to the somatic grounds of reason. One’s mimetic identification with the victims of Auschwitz arouses a self-preserving desire to intercede in and re-orient the progress of reason itself, for the sake of one’s own somatic integrity. In closing, I claim – contra Zuidervaart – that this reading allows us to place the ethical as primary in Adorno, without reducing the political to it. 相似文献
2.
Professor Raphael Sassower 《Science and engineering ethics》1996,2(3):277-290
Auschwitz and Hiroshima stand out as two realities whose uniqueness must be reconciled with their inevitability as outcomes
of highly rationalized processes of technoscientific progress. Contrary to Michael Walzer’s notion of “double effect”, whereby
unintended consequences and the particular uses to which warfare may lead remain outside the moral purview of scientists,
this paper endorses the commitment of the Society for Social Responsibility in Science to argue that members of the technoscientific
community are always responsible for their work and the eventual uses made of it. In what follows four related views are outlined
pertaining to modern situations within which the technoscientific community operates, so as to highlight the urgency of infusing
a sense of responsibility for the products of their activities into this community. A provisional “code” is suggested that
may serve as a guide for increased personal responsibility of individual technoscientists (academic scientists and industrial
engineers). 相似文献
3.
4.
James Phillips 《International Journal of Philosophical Studies》2013,21(2):129-158
Two central strands in Arendt's thought are the reflection on the evil of Auschwitz and the rethinking in terms of politics of Heidegger's critique of metaphysics. Given Heidegger's taciturnity regarding Auschwitz and Arendt's own taciturnity regarding the philosophical implications of Heidegger's political engagement in 1933, to set out how these strands interrelate is to examine the coherence of Arendt's thought and its potential for a critique of Heidegger. By refusing to countenance a theological conception of the evil of Auschwitz, Arendt consolidates the break with theology that Heidegger attempts through his analysis of the essential finitude of Dasein. In the light of Arendt's account of evil, it is possible to see the theological vestiges in Heidegger's ontology. Heidegger's resumption of the question concerning the categorical interconnections of the ways of Being entails an abandonment of finitude: he accommodates and tacitly justifies that which can have no human justification. 相似文献
1