Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Norms, ethics, philosophy: norms define which actions are permitted, advisable or prohibited when certain circumstances are present. The philosophical discussion deals mainly with questions of its justification.
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

Books on Amazon
I 83
Norms/standards/Brandom: not from collective action, that does not exist - Community must not be personalized - it is always about individual members.
I 84
Basic: I-You relationship - instead I-We-relationship. - Community: how much agreement is enough? - Brandom: there are always authorities and experts.
I 96
Normss/Brandom: from what we do, not part of the nature of things.
I ~ 105
Norms/standards/Brandom: depend on our community: they are our standards - concepts: irrespective of community, the facts decide about it - concepts are non-discoursive: Discussions do not decide about them.
I 867
Norms/standards/Brandom: normative attitudes prevail - definitions are not causally effective on their own - standards are not objects in the causal order - talking about status cannot replace talk about actually occupied positions - what follows from p cannot be identified with my actual accounting - A: phenomenalistic view the standards, but it is a normative phenomenalism.
I 898
Norms/Brandom: our own practices confront us already with internal standards - 1) in the guise of deontic status: definition and authorization - (in the eye of the beholder) - 2) The accuracies themselves are being reflected (account management).
II 52
Norms/HegelVsKant: not only noumenally but socially rooted.
II 54
Standards/Hume: attributed to wishes - BrandomVsHume: explanation by definition on patterns of practical inference - i.e. What is a desire and what is not?

Bra I
R. Brandom
Expressive Vernunft Frankfurt 2000

Bra II
R. Brandom
Begr√ľnden und Begreifen Frankfurt 2001

> Counter arguments against Brandom

> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-27