東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Whose virtues? Which language? A c...

Smith, Ronald Scott.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Whose virtues? Which language? A critique of MacIntyre's and Hauerwas's "Wittgensteinian" virtue ethics (Alasdair MacIntyre, Stanley Hauerwas, Ludwig Wittgenstein).

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Whose virtues? Which language? A critique of MacIntyre's and Hauerwas's "Wittgensteinian" virtue ethics (Alasdair MacIntyre, Stanley Hauerwas, Ludwig Wittgenstein)./
作者:	Smith, Ronald Scott.
面頁冊數:	337 p.
附註:	Adviser: John Crossley.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International62-06A.
標題:	Philosophy. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3018127
ISBN:	0493289240

Whose virtues? Which language? A critique of MacIntyre's and Hauerwas's "Wittgensteinian" virtue ethics (Alasdair MacIntyre, Stanley Hauerwas, Ludwig Wittgenstein).
Smith, Ronald Scott.

Whose virtues? Which language? A critique of MacIntyre's and Hauerwas's "Wittgensteinian" virtue ethics (Alasdair MacIntyre, Stanley Hauerwas, Ludwig Wittgenstein). - 337 p.

Adviser: John Crossley.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Southern California, 2000.

Indeed, virtue ethics seems to require metaphysical and epistemological realism. Any further work ought to be developed along such lines.

ISBN: 0493289240Subjects--Topical Terms:

516511
Philosophy.

Whose virtues? Which language? A critique of MacIntyre's and Hauerwas's "Wittgensteinian" virtue ethics (Alasdair MacIntyre, Stanley Hauerwas, Ludwig Wittgenstein).
LDR:03282nam 2200349 a 45 001 937739
005 20110511
008 110511s2000 eng d
020 $a 0493289240
035 $a (UnM)AAI3018127
035 $a AAI3018127
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Smith, Ronald Scott. $3 1261596
245 1 0 $a Whose virtues? Which language? A critique of MacIntyre's and Hauerwas's "Wittgensteinian" virtue ethics (Alasdair MacIntyre, Stanley Hauerwas, Ludwig Wittgenstein).
300 $a 337 p.
500 $a Adviser: John Crossley.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 62-06, Section: A, page: 2145.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Southern California, 2000.
520 $a Indeed, virtue ethics seems to require metaphysical and epistemological realism. Any further work ought to be developed along such lines.
520 $a More than anyone else, Alasdair MacIntyre and Stanley Hauerwas have helped revive contemporary interest in virtue ethics. MacIntyre has helped shape philosophical concerns, while Hauerwas has emphasized Christian ethics. Crucially, they have recast Aristotelian and Thomistic virtue ethics into a Wittgensteinian linguistic framework. But that transformation away from a metaphysically and epistemologically realistic framework into a Wittgensteinian one is not workable, for they beg the most important questions. They either deny access to an extra-linguistic realm, which they yet seem to presuppose, or their claims are merely those of a community which they do not sufficiently specify.
520 $a They also beg the question about the meaningfulness of behavior. While arguing that meaning is use, and that there is no such thing as a private language, they nonetheless presuppose the primacy of first-person awarenesses to fix rules, properly use terms, etc. Furthermore, even within language-games, behaviors will not fix meanings, for they are inherently ambiguous.
520 $a They also presuppose that a self exists apart from language that provides the identity of a character in a story. Narrative unity cannot supply that sameness since a narrative is just a set of linguistic ascriptions. But since those sets change whenever a new ascription is made, the character cannot be the same person through such changes. Thus, the person cannot grow, especially in virtue.
520 $a Both authors also assume the truth of Christianity, but their Wittgensteinian approach creates several difficulties. If language and world are internally related, then the prospects for special revelation are dim. God's breaking through language bifurcates the world and language.
520 $a Last, MacIntyre and Hauerwas fail to rebut the charge of relativism. A given society might make its world by its use of its language such that incredible atrocities could be justified. Even appeals to the Bible will not necessarily help since various Christian communities construct its meaning by their use of their own language.
590 $a School code: 0208.
650 4 $a Philosophy. $3 516511
650 4 $a Religion, Philosophy of. $3 1017774
650 4 $a Theology. $3 516533
690 $a 0322
690 $a 0422
690 $a 0469
710 2 0 $a University of Southern California. $3 700129
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 62-06A.
790 $a 0208
790 1 0 $a Crossley, John, $e advisor
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2000
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3018127