当代知识论的德性转型——台湾东吴大学哲学系米建国教授学术访谈
发布时间：2019-03-24 13:04
【摘要】：2014年,E.Sosa、M.Slote和米建国三人分别代表德性知识论、德性伦理学和中国哲学共同宣称一个德性转向的时代已经来临,整个人文社会科学研究领域都存在"德性转向"。目前,学界存在两种德性知识论:一种是以E.Sosa为代表的"德性可靠论",认为德性知识论要面对知识的确定性问题,面对怀疑论的挑战,它要思考如何通过我们可靠认知机制来获得一种知识上的确定性。这派的影响力更适合当代西方知识论的主流后盖梯尔(Post-Gettier)的传统。另外一派是以L.Zagzebski为代表的德性责任论,是一种以人格特质为基础的德性知识论,以伦理学的架构模型来处理知识论的议题。两者之间的区别在于:Sosa一派是把知识当做行动在研究,即知识作为行动(knowledge as action),而Zagzebski是在谈知识的价值,即在行动中的知识(knowledge in action)。
[Abstract]:In 2014, E. Sosa, M. Slote and Mi Jianguo respectively represented the theory of moral knowledge, moral ethics and Chinese philosophy claimed that an era of moral turn had arrived, and that there was a "moral turn" in the whole field of humanities and social science research. At present, there are two kinds of moral theory of knowledge in academic circles: one is the "theory of reliability of virtue", represented by E.Sosa, which holds that the theory of moral knowledge has to face the problem of certainty of knowledge and the challenge of skepticism. It is to think about how we can obtain a knowledge of certainty through our reliable cognitive mechanism. The influence of this school is better suited to the mainstream post-Post-Gettier tradition of contemporary Western knowledge. The other is the theory of moral responsibility represented by L.Zagzebski, which is a kind of moral theory of knowledge based on personality traits, and deals with the topic of epistemology with the framework model of ethics. The difference between the two is that the Sosa faction regards knowledge as action in research, that is, knowledge as action (knowledge as action), and Zagzebski is talking about the value of knowledge, that is, knowledge in action, (knowledge in action).
【作者单位】： 台湾东吴大学哲学系;复旦大学马克思主义学院;
【分类号】：B82-02
本文编号：2446350
[Abstract]:In 2014, E. Sosa, M. Slote and Mi Jianguo respectively represented the theory of moral knowledge, moral ethics and Chinese philosophy claimed that an era of moral turn had arrived, and that there was a "moral turn" in the whole field of humanities and social science research. At present, there are two kinds of moral theory of knowledge in academic circles: one is the "theory of reliability of virtue", represented by E.Sosa, which holds that the theory of moral knowledge has to face the problem of certainty of knowledge and the challenge of skepticism. It is to think about how we can obtain a knowledge of certainty through our reliable cognitive mechanism. The influence of this school is better suited to the mainstream post-Post-Gettier tradition of contemporary Western knowledge. The other is the theory of moral responsibility represented by L.Zagzebski, which is a kind of moral theory of knowledge based on personality traits, and deals with the topic of epistemology with the framework model of ethics. The difference between the two is that the Sosa faction regards knowledge as action in research, that is, knowledge as action (knowledge as action), and Zagzebski is talking about the value of knowledge, that is, knowledge in action, (knowledge in action).
【作者单位】： 台湾东吴大学哲学系;复旦大学马克思主义学院;
【分类号】：B82-02
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前6条
1 陈英涛;;索萨的德性知识论[J];世界哲学;2011年01期
2 郝苑;;理智德性与认知视角——论欧内斯特·索萨的德性知识论[J];自然辩证法研究;2011年04期
3 方红庆;;索萨的德性知识论:问题与前景[J];自然辩证法研究;2013年01期
4 方红庆;;从奎因到索萨——论自然化知识论的德性转向[J];科学技术哲学研究;2014年01期
5 吴秋兰;;关于“无知的智慧”的确证[J];福建师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2009年05期
6 ;[J];;年期
相关重要报纸文章 前1条
1 台湾哲学学会会长、东吴大学哲学系教授 米建国;德性知识论的争论与前瞻[N];社会科学报;2014年
相关硕士学位论文 前1条
1 徐婧超;走出“确证”的困境[D];浙江师范大学;2015年
，本文编号：2446350
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/falvlunlilunwen/2446350.html
