Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The power of emotions to influence judgment, including political attitudes, has been recognized since classical antiquity. Aristotle, in his treatise Rhetoric, described emotional arousal as critical to persuasion, "The orator persuades by means of his hearers, when they are roused to emotion by his speech; for the judgments we deliver are not the same when we are influenced by joy or sorrow ...
Communication ethics is a sub-branch of moral philosophy concerning the understanding of manifestations of communicative interaction. [1] Every human interaction involves communication and ethics, whether implicitly or explicitly. Intentional and unintentional ethical dilemmas arise frequently in daily life.
Frankfurt's examples are significant because they suggest an alternative way to defend the compatibility of moral responsibility and determinism, in particular by rejecting the first premise of the argument. According to this view, responsibility is compatible with determinism because responsibility does not require the freedom to do otherwise.
Ethical dilemmas come in different types. The distinctions between these types are often important for disagreements about whether there are ethical dilemmas or not. Certain arguments for or against their existence may apply only to some types but not to other types. And only some types, if any, may constitute genuine ethical dilemmas.
The Theory of Communicative Action (German: Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns) is a two-volume 1981 book by the philosopher Jürgen Habermas, in which the author continues his project of finding a way to ground "the social sciences in a theory of language", [1] which had been set out in On the Logic of the Social Sciences (1967).
Discourse ethics refers to a type of argument that attempts to establish normative or ethical truths by examining the presuppositions of discourse. [1] The ethical theory originated with German philosophers Jürgen Habermas and Karl-Otto Apel , and variations have been used by Frank Van Dun and Habermas' student Hans-Hermann Hoppe .
Guyer stated that Schopenhauer raised important questions regarding the possibility of Kant's transcendental arguments and proofs. However, even though Schopenhauer objected to Kant's method, he accepted many of Kant's conclusions. For example, Kant's description of experience and its relation to space, time, and causality was accepted.
[116] [117] As he clarified, "When we say that good is what all desire, it is not to be understood that every kind of good thing is desired by all, but that whatever is desired has the nature of good." [118] In other words, even those who desire evil desire it "only under the aspect of good," i.e., of what is desirable. [119]