Preproceedings 2006 - Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Action and Morality: A Reflection on Thomas Nagel’s and Christine Korsgaard’s Moral Thinking - Marek Pyka Darwall, Stephen, Gibbard, Allan and Railton, Peter ’ 1992 “Toward Fin de siecle Ethics: Some Trends” Philosophical Review, 101 115- 89. Cohon, Rachel 2000 The Roots of Reason, Philosophical Review 109, 63-85. Korsgaard, Christine 1996 The Sources of Normativity, New York: Cambridge University Press Korsgaard, Christine 1997 “The Normativity of Instrumental Reason”, in: Garrett Cullity and Berys Gaut (eds.), Ethics and Practical Reason, New York: Oxford University Press Nagel, Thomas 1970 The Possibility of Altruism, Oxford: Clarendon Press Nagel, Thomas 1986 The View from Nowhere, New York: Oxford University Press Searle, John 2001 Rationality in Action, Cambridge Ma: The MIT Press 265
Peter Singer’s Utilitarianism versus Tom Regan’s Rights View. A Comparative Study Leszek Pyra, University of Krakow, Poland 1. Peter Singer’s Utilitarianism In his numerous books and articles Peter Singer, a philosopher from Australia, takes the position of a radical thinker, defending animals against the brutal exploitation of man. He aims at a reformulation of the notion of equality so that it refers not only to humans but also to animals. The author notes that when one analyses the notion of equality referring to all human beings, one must inevitably come to the conclusion that there is no real equality at all. Humans evidently differ among themeselves as far as their race, size, weight, height and any other imaginable criteria are considered. Therefore equality is not a simple ascertainment of facts, but rather a moral obligation of how humans should treat each other, an ideal norm which should be pursued by all individuals. Henry Sidgwick expresses this idea as follows: “The good of any individual is of no more importance, from the point of view (if I may say so) of the Universe, than the good of any other.”(Sidgwick, 382) As a result Singer accepts a somewhat controversial assumption: all animals, both human animals and non-human animals are equal, especially in a moral sense. From the principle of equality it follows that we should condemn so-called “speciesism”, claims Singer. It seems that the notion was coined by Richard D. Ryder in his book Speciesism: the Ethics of Vivisection. (Ryder 1974) Speciesism smacks of rasism or sexism, as Singer observes, and as such it should be discarded. In this context the Australian thinker introduces the principle of equal consideration of interests which, according to him, should refer not only to humans, but also to higher animals. (Singer 1995, 9) One of the first philosophers who was fully aware that the category of sentience is important in man’s relations with animals was Jeremy Bentham. He wrote: “The day may come when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. (...) The question is not, Can they reason? nor Can they talk? But Can they suffer?” (Bentham, 311-12). Only when living beings are sentient may they possess any interests, otherwise it is not possible. When a boy walking along a path kicks a stone such act does not matter morally, because a stone is not sentient. The situation is totally different in case of a mouse, which is sentient and when kicked may be killed or seriously injured, as Singer notes. Therefore the category of sentience, which means the ability to feel pleasure or pain, is the only non-arbitrary category of respecting the interests of other sentient beings. Peter Singer, in the book edited together with Tom Regan (!), writes: “If a being is not capable of suffering, or of experiencing enjoyment or happiness, there is nothing to be taken into account. This is why the limit of sentience (...) is the only defensible boundary of concern for the interests of others.” (Singer 1976, 154) All other criteria seem to be arbitrary, as the Australian author claims. For most people living in the so-called affluent societies the most common, fundamental contact with animals is when they eat meat. The Eskimos living in very harsh climatic conditions are justified when they do this, because otherwise they would not survive. But humans 266 living in rich, western societies cannot defend their menu in such a way. They should stop eating meat for moral reasons, as Singer claims. Medical sciences prove that eating meat is not necessary as far as good health and long life are concerned. When one takes into consideration the fact that animals are fed with corn and other foodstuff one must eventually realise that there remains less food for men than more, because the food offered to animals could be prepared so that humans could eat it. In this context Singer strongly underlines that people eat meat first of all because they like its taste. But not all use of animals means killing themg.Taking care of milk cows and milking them does not endanger any fundamental animal interests. Similarly when man breeds hen for eggs, and of course keeps them in the open air during the day, no vital interests of animals seem to be disregarded. Finally Singer claims that the principle of equal consideration of interests requires that we abandon the existing ways of exploiting of animals. It is of course obvious that intensive farming (animal factories) should be abolished. In this context Singer strongly underlines that humans should generally develop a vegetarian style of life which he and his family have adopted. The author is fully aware that his insistance on general vegetarianism is a sheer utopia, but morality as such extends over centuries (Singer, 1981) and he hopes that in future the principle of equal consideration of interests will be accepted and observed by all men. 2. Tom Regan’s Rights View Constructing his own, original theory defending animals the American philosopher, Tom Regan, begins by evaluation some non-deontological theories. He also takes into consideration the utilitarian theory and discusses the version according to which acts are good when they bring an inner good for each party involved; otherwise they are wrong. The author ultimately does not accept utilitarianism, because it may tend to accept evident wrong-doing, for example, when the suffering of an innocent person brings happines to many humans. Regan, constructing his theory, pays much attention to the so called deontological theories based upon the category of duty. Immanuel Kant is perhaps the best known author propagating such a theory. According to Kant human beings are all of equal value and as such they should be treated as an end, and not only means to an end. On the basis of such theories different theories of rights are constructed, especially human rights, at first moral rights and then legal ones, which are the expression of a given legislation. But as far as Kant’s deontology is concerned, the theory seems fruitless when applied to animals, because it considers only secondary human duties to animals, and does not allow attributing primary duties to them. And thus the Kantian theory adheres to the Lockean tradition, also propagating secondary duties of men to animals. (Axfell, 225-6). Rights may be divided into two categories: thosse connected with freedom and those connected with claims. The first ones mean that one possesses freedom of
Page 2 and 3:
Kulturen: Konflikt-Analyse-Dialog C
Page 4 and 5:
Cultures: Conflict-Analysis-Dialogu
Page 6 and 7:
Inhalt / Contents Inhalt / Contents
Page 8 and 9:
Inhalt / Contents Zar'a-Jacob und W
Page 10:
Inhalt / Contents A Complicated For
Page 13 and 14:
12 Egoism, Coexistence, and the Pos
Page 15 and 16:
A Naturalistic Method for Therapy n
Page 17 and 18:
«views from nowhere»“ (Geertz 2
Page 19 and 20:
Our thesis is that the dichotomy be
Page 21 and 22:
Der Vorrang der Logik vor der Metap
Page 23 and 24:
sein [muss]“(TB 24.7.16), so wie
Page 25 and 26:
24 Jenseits des nichtzweifelnden Be
Page 27 and 28:
Intercultural Dialog and Mathematic
Page 29 and 30:
References 28 Intercultural Dialog
Page 31 and 32:
While half a muffin is still a piec
Page 33 and 34:
References Abrahams, Gerald 1952 Th
Page 35 and 36:
Hence Wittgenstein states: “Not,
Page 37 and 38:
About “die letzte Zusammenfassung
Page 39 and 40:
Groag remembers to have had in wint
Page 41 and 42:
Surprisingly enough, the late Wittg
Page 43 and 44:
Wittgenstein and Kripke’s Skeptic
Page 45 and 46:
5. Concluding remarks For Wittgenst
Page 47 and 48:
Here something strange happens, how
Page 49 and 50:
attribution of beliefs and the inte
Page 51 and 52:
Ist meine eigene Weltanschuung thir
Page 53 and 54:
Literatur: 52 Ist meine eigene Welt
Page 55 and 56:
54 An economist’s reflections on
Page 57 and 58:
56 An economist’s reflections on
Page 59 and 60:
How to Make Opposite Ends Meet? Ays
Page 61 and 62:
Intercultural Dialogue in Philosoph
Page 63 and 64:
62 Intercultural Dialogue in Philos
Page 65 and 66:
64 On Siamese Twins and Philosophic
Page 67 and 68:
Wittgenstein on Frege on Connective
Page 69 and 70:
Where to seek for the ‘Uniquely I
Page 71 and 72:
Searles Naturalismus: Eine seiner S
Page 73 and 74:
72 Searles Naturalismus: Eine seine
Page 75 and 76:
structures that tend to shade off i
Page 77 and 78:
Probleme der interkulturellen Philo
Page 79 and 80:
Literatur 78 Probleme der interkult
Page 81 and 82:
group theory for obtaining the basi
Page 83 and 84:
Radical Interpretation and Intercul
Page 85 and 86:
References Davidson, Donald 1984 In
Page 87 and 88:
86 Indeterminismus freier Willensen
Page 89 and 90:
Is naturalism progressive? A natura
Page 91 and 92:
References 90 Is naturalism progres
Page 93 and 94:
practice with the philosophers’ (
Page 95 and 96:
Against Their Own Intention: Proble
Page 97 and 98:
96 Against Their Own Intention: Pro
Page 99 and 100:
Recognising Beauty : On The Intercu
Page 101 and 102:
100 Recognising Beauty : On The Int
Page 103 and 104:
102 Trendwende in der Evolution? Ni
Page 105 and 106:
Postmodernismus als Argumentationst
Page 107 and 108:
106 Postmodernismus als Argumentati
Page 109 and 110:
Freud-Jung controversy: a failed in
Page 111 and 112:
wishes, anxiety, guilt and hatred,
Page 113 and 114:
References Freud, Sigmund (1912-13)
Page 115 and 116:
of water beneath a glacier and any
Page 117 and 118:
given physical world and our repres
Page 119 and 120:
would be a further substratum on wh
Page 121 and 122:
Wittgenstein and the Language of Re
Page 123 and 124:
The fact that religious attitude is
Page 125 and 126:
3. Potentials and limitations of de
Page 127 and 128:
Es gibt keinen Dissens, es gibt nur
Page 129 and 130:
128 Es gibt keinen Dissens, es gibt
Page 131 and 132:
akademischem Charakter, natürlich
Page 133 and 134:
132 Wittgenstein's Paperwork. An Ex
Page 135 and 136:
Substance and Attribute in the Cont
Page 137 and 138:
136 Substance and Attribute in the
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
understands the patient's worldview
Page 145 and 146:
Reflections on Ethics and Cultural
Page 147 and 148:
cultures, unless they fail to heed
Page 149 and 150:
identisch ist. Charakteristischerwe
Page 151 and 152:
Nachdenken über Gewissheit - Zur A
Page 153 and 154:
152 Nachdenken über Gewissheit - Z
Page 155 and 156:
154 Zar'a-Jacob und Walda-Heiwat ü
Page 157 and 158:
Wittgenstein on consciousness in
Page 159 and 160:
158 Wittgenstein on consciousness i
Page 161 and 162:
Normalität vs. Naturalität Das er
Page 163 and 164:
Did you do something wrong if you c
Page 165 and 166:
References 164 Did you do something
Page 167 and 168:
zustandekommt. Der Pyrrhoneer ist g
Page 169 and 170:
Wittgenstein’s “notorious parag
Page 171 and 172:
Instead, Gödel always gives a redu
Page 173 and 174:
our view, this plurality of remarks
Page 175 and 176:
Designation and Ontological Commitm
Page 177 and 178:
176 Designation and Ontological Com
Page 179 and 180:
For one thing, those who appeal to
Page 181 and 182:
On the Impossibility of Solitary Pe
Page 183 and 184:
For instance, it takes creative mor
Page 185 and 186:
184 Wittgensteins Philosophieren f
Page 187 and 188:
Derivativeness, production and reac
Page 189 and 190:
4. Conclusion To conclude, Anscombe
Page 191 and 192:
Our concept of non-compositionality
Page 193 and 194:
„Patamou“ oder „El poder de l
Page 195 and 196:
Literatur Breinbauer, Ines Maria 19
Page 197 and 198:
Persons can also have beliefs about
Page 199 and 200:
Wittgenstein, Cavell, and the Fall
Page 201 and 202:
culture in which laws of the intell
Page 203 and 204:
elated in a world-picture. This I d
Page 205 and 206:
Reservations to Human Rights Treati
Page 207 and 208:
legal jargon calls its “objective
Page 209 and 210:
Worin besteht nun dieser Zusammenha
Page 211 and 212:
Do We Really Need Relativism About
Page 213 and 214:
MacFarlane’s and Kölbel’s view
Page 215 and 216: It follows from this approach that
Page 217 and 218: Die Relativität von Gewißheiten K
Page 219 and 220: egierig aufgegriffen werden, insbes
Page 221 and 222: 220 Natural Language and its Speake
Page 229 and 230: Der Beitrag einer „Logik der Phil
Page 231 and 232: 230 Der Beitrag einer „Logik der
Page 233 and 234: einer ausgesprochen lockeren Sprach
Page 235 and 236: Wittgenstein, Waismann and Non-Eucl
Page 237 and 238: importance, since it appears no les
Page 239 and 240: 238 Cultural Alterity and Unilatera
Page 241 and 242: Die Opazität der Oberfläche: Witt
Page 243 and 244: unserer Sprachspiele durch unsere R
Page 245 and 246: 244 A Perspective of Dialogical Eng
Page 247 and 248: Double Meant is not Double Good: A
Page 249 and 250: The Analytic Theory of the A Priori
Page 251 and 252: not white, so the fact that “snow
Page 253 and 254: 252 Experience and social norms in
Page 255 and 256: Can there be such thing as a “hop
Page 257 and 258: feeling that was both thought or fe
Page 259 and 260: 258 Regaining the Sense of the Trac
Page 261 and 262: Brandom on Holism, Communication, a
Page 263 and 264: interpersonal communication is real
Page 265: 264 Action and Morality: A Reflecti
Page 269 and 270: References 268 Peter Singer’s Uti
Page 271 and 272: Wittgenstein affirms that what ‘g
Page 273 and 274: Spiel der Sprache und Sprachspiel -
Page 275 and 276: 274 Spiel der Sprache und Sprachspi
Page 277 and 278: 276 ‘The riddle does not exist’
Page 279 and 280: Zur dringend notwendigen Revision d
Page 281 and 282: 280 Zur dringend notwendigen Revisi
Page 283 and 284: 282 • dass einem die Ressourcen z
Page 285 and 286: Deuten - Missverstehen - ‚Blasphe
Page 287 and 288: 286 Deuten - Missverstehen - ‚Bla
Page 289 and 290: If we can learn a social practice,
Page 291 and 292: Keine Anschauungsgrade besitzt hing
Page 293 and 294: Life’s Infinite Variations: Wittg
Page 295 and 296: another culture is also the sign of
Page 297 and 298: 296 Against cultural identity: a fa
Page 299 and 300: Kann eine Person als Urheber ihrer
Page 301 and 302: 300 Kann eine Person als Urheber ih
Page 303 and 304: Substanz, Kausalität und Freiheit
Page 305 and 306: Im abschließenden Teil des Vortrag
Page 307 and 308: verstehen). D.h.: das Verstehen ein
Page 309 and 310: Towards an Intercultural Phenomenol
Page 311 and 312: 310 Towards an Intercultural Phenom
Page 313 and 314: feel envy towards his brother witho
Page 315 and 316: idges chronological distances; for
Page 317 and 318:
Sprache im interkulturellen Dialog
Page 319 and 320:
Abweichung in seinem Sprachgebrauch
Page 321 and 322:
kind of mythology (cf. Wittgenstein
Page 323 and 324:
Social Criticism through Internal a
Page 325 and 326:
Interkulturelle Philosophie in Russ
Page 327 and 328:
326 Interkulturelle Philosophie in
Page 329 and 330:
Wissenschaft begnügen und daher nu
Page 331 and 332:
Das, was er in seinem Brief an Herm
Page 333 and 334:
Essence/Attribute in Islamic Philos
Page 335 and 336:
Konvergenzen in grundlegenden Prinz
Page 337 and 338:
individuellen Freiheit (Stelzer 200
Page 339 and 340:
experience gives an epistemological
Page 341 and 342:
The Fraissè Theorem and Goodman’
Page 343 and 344:
3.5) i) Sentences satisfied by elem
Page 345 and 346:
Outline of Arguments against Natura
Page 347 and 348:
346 Outline of Arguments against Na
Page 349 and 350:
Reason, red in tooth and claw: natu
Page 351 and 352:
Importantly, where Pascal saw in hu
Page 353 and 354:
352 The Significance of Intercultur
Page 355 and 356:
354 Wittgenstein, the artistic way
Page 357 and 358:
A Neo-pragmatist Approach to Interc
Page 359 and 360:
358 A Neo-pragmatist Approach to In
Page 361 and 362:
360 A Neo-pragmatist Approach to In
Page 363 and 364:
Aber der Löwe spricht eben nicht!
Page 365 and 366:
364 Aber der Löwe spricht eben nic
Page 367 and 368:
366 From Anti-Metaphysics to Non-Py
Page 369 and 370:
Respective Justice through Thick an
Page 371 and 372:
Normativity and Novelty Tine Wilde,
Page 373 and 374:
References Baz, Avnar: 2000, ‘Wha
Page 375 and 376:
374 Towards an Intercultural Phenom
Page 377 and 378:
Das Problem des metaphysischen Subj
Page 379 and 380:
378 Das Problem des metaphysischen
Page 381:
380 Das Problem des metaphysischen
show all

Preproceedings 2006 - Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?