首页    期刊浏览 2025年02月26日 星期三
登录注册

文章基本信息

  • 标题:¿Ha sido derrotada la teoría clásica del Derecho natural por el argumento de la falacia naturalista?
  • 本地全文:下载
  • 作者:Carlos A. Casanova
  • 期刊名称:Logos. Anales del Seminario de Metafísica
  • 印刷版ISSN:1988-3242
  • 出版年度:2014
  • 卷号:47
  • 页码:37-54
  • DOI:10.5209/rev_ASEM.2014.v47.45801
  • 语种:Spanish
  • 出版社:Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad Complutense
  • 摘要:This paper considers and distinguishes two objections which ordinarily are thought to oppose a realistic conception of ethics: G. E. Moore’s naturalistic fallacy and Hume’s law. After having presented both objections, having developed their presuppositions and consequences and having answered each of them, the paper concludes that it is possible to hold today a realistic conception of ethics. It is structured in the style of a disputed question, divided in six articles.
  • 其他摘要:This paper considers and distinguishes two objections which ordinarily are thought to oppose a realistic conception of ethics: G. E. Moore’s naturalistic fallacy and Hume’s law. After having presented both objections, having developed their presuppositions and consequences and having answered each of them, the paper concludes that it is possible to hold today a realistic conception of ethics. It is structured in the style of a disputed question, divided in six articles.
  • 关键词:G. E. Moore;noción de bien;ley de Hume;ética realista;razón práctica.
  • 其他关键词:G. E. Moore;notion of the good;Hume’s law;realistic ethics;practical reason.
国家哲学社会科学文献中心版权所有