Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Justification, philosophy: justification is a condition for knowledge which a) is fulfilled or not fulfilled by the explanation of the origin of the information or b) by a logical examination of the argument. For a), theories such as the causal theory of knowledge or reliability theories have been developed. See also verification, examination, verification, proofs, externalism. Justification in a broader sense is a statement about the occurrence of an action or a choice. See also explanations, ultimate justification, reasons._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
St. Cavell on Justification - Dictionary of Arguments
II 195 Moral/Ethics/Cavell: attempts of persuasion ("You should") represent not the paradigm but the collapse of morality. >Morals, >Ethics, >Norms, >Community, >Action. II 195/196 Justification/Cavell: just like this we can see justifications as the collapse of our conventions. >Convention. The assumption that the appeal to a rule is only justified, if this rule itself is justified, can make such an appeal seem only hypocritical. >Rules. Rule/Determination/Cavell: There is a complementarity between the two. How could we overlook it? Because of the false assumption that a rule must be an imperative ("you should") instead of simply describing how something is done. >Rule/Cavell. II 199 Apology/Cavell: if there were corresponding duties for all excuses, there would be no excuses and action would be intolerable. We are not bound in any action to make sure that none of the vast amounts of possibilities happens where something goes wrong. >Excuse._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Cavell I St. Cavell Die Unheimlichkeit des Gewöhnlichen Frankfurt 2002 Cavell I (a) Stanley Cavell "Knowing and Acknowledging" in: St. Cavell, Must We Mean What We Say?, Cambridge 1976, pp. 238-266 In Die Unheimlichkeit des Gewöhnlichen, Stanley Cavell, Frankfurt/M. 2002 Cavell I (b) Stanley Cavell "Excursus on Wittgenstein’s Vision of Language", in: St. Cavell, The Claim of Reason, Wittgenstein, Skepticism, Morality, and Tragedy, New York 1979, pp. 168-190 In Die Unheimlichkeit des Gewöhnlichen, Stanley Cavell, Frankfurt/M. 2002 Cavell I (c) Stanley Cavell "The Argument of the Ordinary, Scenes of Instruction in Wittgenstein and in Kripke", in: St. Cavell, Conditions Handsome and Unhandsome: The Constitution of Emersonian Perfectionism, Chicago 1990, pp. 64-100 In Die Unheimlichkeit des Gewöhnlichen, Davide Sparti/Espen Hammer (eds.), Frankfurt/M. 2002 Cavell II Stanley Cavell "Must we mean what we say?" in: Inquiry 1 (1958) In Linguistik und Philosophie, G. Grewendorf/G. Meggle, Frankfurt/M. 1974/1995 |
||
> Counter arguments against Cavell
> Counter arguments in relation to Justification
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-18