Philosophers have long suspected that thought and discourse about what we ought to do differ in some fundamental way from statements about what is. But the difference has proved elusive, in part because the two kinds of statement look alike. Focusing on judgments that express decisions - judgments about what is to be done, all things considered - Allan Gibbard offers a compelling argument for reconsidering, and reconfiguring, the distinctions between normative and descriptive discourse - between questions of "ought" and "is."
具體描述
讀後感
評分
評分
評分
評分
評分
用戶評價
评分
评分
评分
评分
评分
相關圖書
本站所有內容均為互聯網搜索引擎提供的公開搜索信息，本站不存儲任何數據與內容，任何內容與數據均與本站無關，如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度，google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美書屋 版权所有