The Being of Values Juruś, Dariusz
Relacje Międzykulturowe,
12/2022, Letnik:
7, Številka:
2(12)
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
In this paper I present three main approaches to the problem of the being of values by discussing objectivism, subjectivism and relationism referring to historical positions. I conclude that ...axiological discourse, when reduced to the horizontal dimension, leads to the relativisation of all values, the process of blurring the boundaries to their eventual annihilation.
The search for spaces of cooperation between the methodology of natural sciences (cognitive sciences in particular) and the phenomenological approach has gained importance over time. However, it is ...necessary not to lose sight of the fact that Husserlian phenomenology was first and foremost characterized by a profound critique of ontological naturalism, a critique crucial for understanding the ethical sense of the phenomenological operation. To clarify this point, it is necessary to clarify the problematic role that naturalism has played - and continues to play - on the ethical level, and the way in which phenomenological criticism is able to neutralize it. In the following pages we will first try to illustrate the impact of ontological naturalism on the contemporary ethical vision and then to show how the phenomenological perspective is best understandable as a way to reveal the blind spots of naturalism, to denounce its implicit reductionism, and to reopen an ethical perspective that the historical establishment of a naturalistic worldview had artificially closed.
Alone in Song (The Poetry of Ada Salas)
Cuadernos para investigación de la literatura hispánica/Cuadernos para la investigación de la literatura hispánica,
04/2021
Journal Article
U ovom radu nudim interpretaciju Mercierove kritike modernog pristupa spoznajnom problemu. Interpretacija počiva uglavnom na razlikovanju između objekta i stvari i na razlikovanju između objektivnoga ...i transobjektivnoga. Ta dva razlikovanja prožimaju Mercierovu kritiku, premda ih on nigdje ne razrađuje. U ovom radu, razrađujem te dvije distinkcije, da bih im potom pustio da, tako razrađene, prožmu Mercierovu kritiku iznova, s konačnim rezultatom koji, u osnovi, pokazuje da Mercierova kritika počiva na načelima objektivizma i objektivnoga realizma, nasuprot transobjektivnome realizmu, i na motivu povratka svijeta umu koji ga je stvorio, nasuprot modernoj koncepciji stvarnosti odvojene od uma.
In this paper, an interpretation of Mercier’s critique of the modern approach to the problem of knowledge is offered. The interpretation rests mainly on the distinction between the object and the thing and on the distinction between the objective and the transobjective. These two distinctions permeate Mercier's critique, though he never explicitly elaborates on them. I elaborate the distinctions and let them permeate the critique anew, now in their elaborate form. As a result, Mercier's critique is interpreted as resting fundamentally on the tenets of objectivism and objective realism, as opposed to the position of transobjective realism, and on the motive of bringing the world back to the mind who created it, as opposed to the modern background conception of mindless reality.
The interpretation of visual data obtained in a field study is substantially determined by the procedure for obtaining them. The purpose of the article is to analyze the process of social ...construction of visual sociological data by a researcher with a camera. Visual data are contradictory. On the one hand, the data represent physical imprint of reality. This is due to the technology of photography. The absolutization of this quality is fraught with overestimation of the authenticity of photographs. On the other hand, data are created by an observer who cannot but leave his/ or her mark on their content and form. The interpretation of visual data of the field research requires to take into account the nature of this print.In the process of social construction of visual data, several qualitatively different stages can be distinguished. (1) The observer's identification of “pixels” of facts in the unbroken stream of social reality. (2) Sorting them. He/ or she gives them the status of “important”, “curious” or puts them out of the brackets of observer’s attention. The very process of creating data is already their interpretation. (3) Framing adequate to the subject of the study. (4) Selection in the frame of the element on which focusing is performed. (5) Selecting the moment of picture creation. (6) Sorting of received pictures. Some are erased for various reasons, others get into the database. (7) Processing of the picture (cropping “excess”, adjusting the focus of attention using the light level, etc.). In the process of moving from stage to stage of observation, sociological facts turn into data as material for further analysis.All sociological data are social constructs. The photographs obtained in the field study are no exception. Their reliability is ensured, firstly, by the analysis of the procedure for obtaining them, fraught with subjectification of reality, secondly, by the use of triangulation of sources, observers and methodologies; thirdly, by the reputation of the researcher.
The author agrees with much of Roger E. Bissell's critique of the Objectivist idea of volition (in his July 2015 essay, “Where There's a Will, There's a ‘Why’: A Critique of the Objectivist Theory of ...Volition”), especially as expressed by Leonard Peikoff. On the other hand, the author believes Bissell's reform of the Objectivist conception is at best minimal and it lacks attention to thinking as an integral part of volition.
People often justify their moral opinions by referring to larger moral concerns (e. g., "It is
if homosexuals are not allowed to marry!" vs. "Letting homosexuals marry is against our
!"). Is there a ...general agreement about what concerns apply to different moral opinions? We used surveys in the United States and the United Kingdom to measure the perceived applicability of eight concerns (harm, violence, fairness, liberty, authority, ingroup, purity, and governmental overreach) to a wide range of moral opinions. Within countries, argument applicability scores were largely similar whether they were calculated among women or men, among young or old, among liberals or conservatives, or among people with or without higher education. Thus, the applicability of a given moral concern to a specific opinion can be viewed as an objective quality of the opinion, largely independent of the population in which it is measured. Finally, we used similar surveys in Israel and Brazil to establish that this independence of populations also extended to populations in different countries. However, the extent to which this holds across cultures beyond those included in the current study is still an open question.
It is controversial whether ordinary people regard beliefs about the wrongness of harmful actions as objectively correct. Our deflationary hypothesis, consistent with much of the evidence, is that ...people are objectivists about harmful actions
that are perceived to involve injustice
: when two parties disagree about whether such an action is wrong, people think that only one party is correct (the party believing that the action is wrong). However, Sarkissian and colleagues claimed that this evidence is misleading, showing that when the two disagreeing parties are from radically different cultures or species, people tend to think that both parties are correct (a non-objectivist position). We argue that Sarkissian et al.'s studies have some methodological limitations. In particular, participants may have assumed that the exotic or alien party misunderstood the harmful action, and this assumption, rather than a genuinely non-objectivist stance, may have contributed to the increase in non-objectivist responses. Study 1 replicated Sarkissian et al.'s results with additional follow-up measures probing participants' assumptions about how the exotic or alien party understood the harmful action, which supported our suspicion that their results are inconclusive and therefore do not constitute reliable evidence against the deflationary hypothesis. Studies 2 and 3 modified Sarkissian et al.'s design to provide a clear-cut and reliable test of the deflationary hypothesis. In Study 2, we addressed potential issues with their design, including those concerning participants' assumptions about how the exotic or alien party understood the harmful action. In Study 3, we manipulated the alien party's capacity to understand the harmful action. With these changes to the design, high rates of objectivism emerged, consistent with the deflationary hypothesis. Studies 4a and 4b targeted the deflationary hypothesis more precisely by manipulating perceptions of injustice to see the effect on objectivist responding and by probing the more specific notion of objectivism entailed by our hypothesis. The results fully supported the deflationary hypothesis.