Приказ основних података о документу
Naturalistička greška i argument otvorenog pitanja - jedan vek rasprave
Naturalistic fallacy and open question argument: One century of debate
dc.creator | Cekić, Nenad | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-10-12T10:49:42Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-10-12T10:49:42Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2008 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0351-2274 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/752 | |
dc.description.abstract | Autor u ovom tekstu razmatra istorijat i pravce rasprava o problemu tzv. 'naturalističke greške' kojeg je u svojoj knjizi Principi etike uočio još Dž. E. Mur. Detaljnija analiza pokazuje da se problem naturalističke greške zapravo temelji na 'argumentu otvorenog pitanja'. Argument otvorenog pitanja po mišljenju autora jeste koristan instrument u metaetičkim raspravama i dobar test za valjanost normativno-etičkih teorija ali nije konkluzivan dokument ne samo protiv naturalizma već ni protiv kognitivizma uopšte. Autor nudi uvid i u savremene rasprave o argumentu otvorenog pitanja koje su oživele krajem 20. i početkom 21. veka. Analiziraju se i 'poboljšanja' argumenta otvorenog pitanja, ali i kritike tih poboljšanja. Predmet analize su argumenti koje pružaju metaetičati na početku 21. veka, kao što su: Darval, Gibard, Railton, Horgan, Timons i 'realisti sa Kornela'. Kao zaključak autor nudi nacrt svoje vizije odnosa metaetike i normativne etike, upravo kroz prizmu analize uloge argumenta otvorenog pitanja u savremenoj filozofiji morala. | sr |
dc.description.abstract | Maybe the most famous and used notion in relatively short history of metaethics is so called 'naturalistic fallacy'. This term was for the first time used by G. E. Moore in his Prinicipia Ethica. Idea of 'naturalistic fallacy' is based upon 'open-question argument'. Discussion of the scope and real results obtained by this argument is open even in metaethics at the beginning of the 21st Century. Today it is clear that open question is not a proof of invalidity of naturalism or any kind of cognitivism. Still, open-question argument is a very useful tool both in metaethics and in normative theories. In this article reader can find direction of the contemporary debate about naturalistic fallacy, naturalism and some modified versions of classical open-question argument. | en |
dc.publisher | Srpsko filozofsko društvo, Beograd | |
dc.rights | openAccess | |
dc.source | Theoria | |
dc.subject | naturalizam | sr |
dc.subject | naturalistička greška | sr |
dc.subject | metaetika | sr |
dc.subject | kognitivizam | sr |
dc.subject | argumentotvornog pitanja | sr |
dc.subject | open-question argument | en |
dc.subject | naturalistic fallacy | en |
dc.subject | naturalism | en |
dc.subject | cognitivism | en |
dc.title | Naturalistička greška i argument otvorenog pitanja - jedan vek rasprave | sr |
dc.title | Naturalistic fallacy and open question argument: One century of debate | en |
dc.type | article | |
dc.rights.license | ARR | |
dc.citation.epage | 53 | |
dc.citation.issue | 3 | |
dc.citation.other | 51(3): 29-53 | |
dc.citation.spage | 29 | |
dc.citation.volume | 51 | |
dc.identifier.fulltext | http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/id/2282/749.pdf | |
dc.identifier.rcub | https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_752 | |
dc.type.version | publishedVersion |