Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Keywords
  • Date

Search results

Number of results: 3
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This paper aims at presenting a transcendental argument, so termed and constructed by John Rawls, as a justification of his theory of ‘justice as fairness’. The crucial stage in the chain of his reasoning is to establish the necessary condition of the political arrangement of the basic structure of society. This condition turns out to be acceptability of the publicly endorsed principles in the original position. However, the procedure of exercising free choice, as described by Rawls, presupposes a philosophical view of human nature, and consequently undermines the presumably purely theoretical basis for the principles of justice. The author discusses the impact of Kantian moral philosophy on Rawls’s theory of justification. He tries to show that the rejection of moral theory in favour of political philosophy was the result of a profound change in Rawls’s attitude to the idea of transcendentalism, as it is evidenced by his later thought.
Go to article

Bibliography

Allison H. (2016), Transcendental Deduction and Transcendental Idealism, „European Journal of Philosophy” 4 (24), s. 920–933.
Ameriks K. (2001), Text and Context: Hermeneutical Prolegomena to Interpreting a Kant Text, w: D. Schönecker, T. Zwenger (red.), Kant verstehen / Understanding Kant. Über die Interpretation philosophischer Texte, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, s. 11–31.
Białek P. (2017), Pycha i skromność rozumu. Współczesny spór o argumenty transcendentalne a filozofia Kanta i Fichtego, Kraków: Universitas.
Callanan J.J. (2011), Making Sense of Doubt: Strawson’s Anti‑Scepticism, „Theoria” 77 (3), s. 261–278.
Grygianiec M. (2019), Status argumentacji transcendentalnej, „Przegląd Filozoficzny – Nowa Seria” 4 (112), s. 131–160.
Guyer P. (2001), Naturalizing Kant, w: D. Schönecker, T. Zwenger (red.), Kant verstehen / Understanding Kant. Über die Interpretation philosophischer Texte, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, s. 59–84.
Kant I. (1957), Krytyka czystego rozumu, przeł. R. Ingarden, t. I, Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Kant I. (1999), Critique of Pure Reason, przeł. i opr. P. Guyer, A.W. Wood, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kędziora K. (2019), John Rawls. Uzasadnienie, sprawiedliwość i rozum publiczny, Bibliotheca Philosophica 5, Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.
Korsgaard Ch. (1995), Rawls and Kant: On the Primacy of the Practical, „Proceedings of the Eighth International Kant Congress”, t. I, Memphis 1999, s. 1165–1173.
Palmer H. (1985), Presupposition and Transcendental Inference, New York: Routledge.
Poręba M. (2008), Możliwość rozumu. Ćwiczenia z metafizyki, Warszawa: Fundacja Aletheia.
Rawls J. (1977), The Basic Structure as Subject, „American Philosophical Quarterly” 2 (14), s. 159–165.
Rawls J. (1980), Kantian Constructivism in Moral Philosophy, „The Journal of Philosophy” 9 (77), s. 515–572.
Rawls J. (1985), Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical, „Philosophy & Public Affairs” 3 (14), s. 223–251.
Rawls J. (1989), Themes in Kant’s Moral Philosophy, w: E. Förster (red.), Kant’s Transcendental Deductions. The Three Critiques and the Opus postumum, Stanford: Stanford University Press, s. 81–113.
Rawls J. (1993), Political Liberalism, New York: Harvard University Press.
Rawls J. (2000), Lectures on the history of moral philosophy, red. B. Herman, Cambridge, MA – London: Harvard University Press.
Rawls J. (2001), Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, red. E. Kelly, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rawls J. (2013), Teoria sprawiedliwości, przeł. M. Panufnik, J. Pasek, A. Romaniuk, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Rorty R. (1999), Pierwszeństwo demokracji wobec filozofii, w: tenże, Obiektywność, relatywizm i prawda. Pisma filozoficzne, przeł. J. Margański, t. I, Warszawa: Fundacja Aletheia, s. 261–291.
Russell B. (2000), Dzieje filozofii Zachodu i jej związki z rzeczywistością polityczno-‑społeczną od czasów najdawniejszych do dnia dzisiejszego, przeł. T. Baszniak, A. Lipszyc, M. Szczubiałka, Warszawa: Fundacja Aletheia.
Sandel M. (1982), Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sellars W. (1956), Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind, „Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science” I, s. 253–329.
Sellars W. (1967), Some Remarks on Kant’s Theory of Experience, „Journal of Philosophy” 64, s. 633–647.
Sellars W. (1968), Science and Metaphysics. Variations on Kantian Themes, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Strawson P.F. (1959), Individuals: An Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics, London: Methuen.
Strawson P.F. (1966), The Bounds of Sense, London: Methuen. Tampio N. (2007), Rawls and the Kantian Ethos, „Polity” 1 (39), s. 79–102.
Wolniewicz B. (2017), Aksjomat Elzenberga, „Przegląd Filozoficzny – Nowa Seria” 4 (110), s. 277–288.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Stanisław Jędrczak
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Uniwersytet Warszawski, Wydział Filozofii, ul. Krakowskie Przedmieście 3, 00‑927 Warszawa
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

From a historical point of view, Peter F. Strawson’s philosophical studies are an important element within contemporary interdisciplinary investigations of the mind-body problem. The aim of this article is to present and analyze Strawson’s program of descriptive metaphysics, along with the associated conception of persons, that he has proposed. In the second part, I also present his non-reductive naturalism, focusing on two of his analyses that belong to the field of mind-body relations: these concern the problem of other minds, and the question of the nomological reduction of mental states of persons to physical ones (i.e. mind-body identity theory). I then point to several possibilities of using Strawson’s conception of persons in the context of issues raised by other questions linked to the mind-body problem (namely, personal identity as it relates to split-brain persons, and the different phases of a person’s development).

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Józef Bremer
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

For Peter F. Strawson, transcendental arguments were an important part of his philosophical method, referred to as a connective analysis. Both Strawson and his critical commentators have devoted a lot of effort to determining the nature, scope and purpose of those arguments. In this text, I intend, first of all, to reconstruct and characterize the basic elements of transcendental argumentation, specifying its general form, features and purpose. Secondly, I reconstruct some of the most representative examples of this argumentation. Thirdly, I refer to the basic objections against transcendental arguments formulated in the literature. Finally, I point to a few peculiarities in those arguments, commonly omitted by commentators and interpreters. The overall message of the paper is moderately positive: transcendental arguments are a legitimate way of reasoning in philosophy, and in particular, they constitute a comprehensible and well-founded part of Strawson’s connective analysis.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Mariusz Grygianiec

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more