Cargando…
Elements of moral cognition : Rawls' linguistic analogy and the cognitive science of moral and legal judgment /
John Mikhail explores whether moral psychology is usefully modelled on aspects of Universal Grammar.
| Clasificación: | Libro Electrónico |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Electrónico eBook |
| Idioma: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
Cambridge :
Cambridge University Press,
2011.
|
| Colección: | Cambridge studies in law and society.
|
| Temas: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Texto completo |
Tabla de Contenidos:
- Cover; Elements of Moral Cognition: Rawls' Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment; Title; Copyright; Dedication; Contents; Tables and Figures; Preface; PART ONE: THEORY; 1: The Question Presented; 2: A New Framework for the Theory of Moral Cognition; 2.1 NINE COMPARISONS BETWEEN LINGUISTICS AND MORAL THEORY; 2.1.1 The Main Questions; 2.1.2 The General Answers; 2.1.3 The Fundamental Arguments; 2.1.4 The Competence-Performance Distinction; 2.1.5 The Distinction between Operative and Express Principles; 2.1.6 Levels of Empirical Adequacy.
- 2.1.7 Two Additional Questions2.1.8 Commonsense and Technical Concepts of Language and Morality; 2.1.9 Theoretical Goals; 2.2 PRELIMINARY CLARIFICATIONS ABOUT RAWLS' LINGUISTIC ANALOGY; 2.3 OUTLINE OF REMAINING CHAPTERS; 3: The Basic Elements of Rawls' Linguistic Analogy; 3.1 EIGHT FEATURES OF RAWLS' CONCEPTION OF MORAL THEORY; 3.1.1 The Argument for Moral Grammar; 3.1.2 The Problem of Descriptive Adequacy; 3.1.3 The Distinction between Descriptive and Observational Adequacy; 3.1.4 The Distinction between Operative and Express Principles.
- 3.1.5 The Distinction between Descriptive and Explanatory Adequacy3.1.6 The Competence-Performance Distinction; 3.1.7 The Theory-Dependence of the Competence-Performance Distinction; 3.1.8 The Importance of Idealization; 3.2 FURTHER CLARIFICATIONS ABOUT TERMINOLOGY; 3.3 MORAL THEORY AS A THEORY OF I-MORALITY; 3.4 SOME FURTHER REMARKS ABOUT THE LINGUISTIC ANALOGY; 3.5 THE CONTRAST WITH PARTICULARISM; PART TWO: EMPIRICAL ADEQUACY; 4: The Problem of Descriptive Adequacy; 4.1 THE TROLLEY PROBLEMS; (4) (a) Scarce Resources: Alice; (b) Transplant: Bob; (c) Trolley: Charlie; (d) Passenger: Denise.
- (E) Bystander: Edward(f) Footbridge: Frank; 4.2 THE PROPERTIES OF MORAL JUDGMENT; 4.3 FRAMING THE PROBLEM OF DESCRIPTIVE ADEQUACY; 4.4 LOCATING THE PROBLEM WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF COGNITIVE SCIENCE; 4.4.1 Perceptual and Acquisition Models; 4.4.2 The Hypothetico-Deductive Method; 4.5 OBJECTIONS AND REPLIES; 5: The Moral Grammar Hypothesis; 5.1 SOME INITIAL EVIDENCE; 5.2 SIMPLIFYING THE PROBLEM OF DESCRIPTIVE ADEQUACY; 5.2.1 Twelve New Trolley Problems; 5.2.2 Twelve Considered Judgments; 5.3 THE POVERTY OF THE PERCEPTUAL STIMULUS; 5.3.1 Labeling the Stimulus; 5.3.2 Expanded Perceptual Model.
- 5.4 OUTLINE OF A SOLUTION5.4.1 Deontic Rules; 5.4.2 Structural Descriptions; 5.4.3 Conversion Rules; 5.5 INTUITIVE LEGAL APPRAISAL; 6: Moral Grammar and Intuitive Jurisprudence: A Formal Model; 6.1 THREE SIMPLIFYING ASSUMPTIONS; 6.2 STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTIONS I: ACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES, AND INTENTIONS; 6.2.1 Acts and Circumstances; 6.2.2 K-Generation and I-Generation; Definition of K-Generation; Definition of I-Generation; 6.3 DEONTIC RULES; 6.3.1 The Principle of Natural Liberty; Principle of Natural Liberty; 6.3.2 The Prohibition of Battery and Homicide; Definition of Homicide.