No description available.

Syftet med denna studie är att undersöka den påstådda universala naturen av mänskliga rättigheter genom att använda mig av debatten kring asiatiska värderingar, som en kulturrelativistisk teori. De grundläggande argumenten som poängteras av försvarare av asiatiska värderingar är att de asiatiska och västerländska stater tillhör olika kulturer som även skiljer i deras uppfattning av etik och moral, vilket påverkar deras olika uppfattning av mänskliga rättigheter. I argumentationsanalysen kring asiatiska värderingar har jag använt mig utav texter från Xiaorong Li, Amartya Sen, Lee Kuan Yew och Mahathir bin Mohamad, då dessa forskare och politiker representerar åsikterna av de två teorierna jag använder mig utav i argumentationsanalysen, universalism och relativism/kulturelativism. Kopplat till denna debatt diskuterar jag även hur ett större konsensus kring internationella mänskliga rättigheter skulle ske, eller ifall det finns en möjlighet för en nedgång av ett internationellt konsensus. Jag har kommit fram till att argumenten från båda sidor i diskussionen presenterade i denna studie har fört fram viktiga åsikter som är av stor betydelse för framtida samarbete mellan stater. I studien framgår det att ett större konsensus (och därför större respekt för mänskliga rättigheter?), kan skapas ifall vi skapar internationella plattformer för diskussion kring kulturella skillnader. Jag har också kommit till slutsatsen att vi förmodligen inte kommer att se en nedgång av konsensusen kring mänskliga rättigheter utan snarare en utveckling av dem. / The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the alleged universal nature of human rights by using the Asian values debate as a cultural relativistic theory. The basic arguments emphasized by defenders of Asian values is that Asian and Western states belong to different cultures that also differ in their perceptions of ethics and morality, which affects their different perceptions of human rights. In my argument analysis on Asian values I have used texts by Xiaorong Li, Amartya Sen, Lee Kuan Yew and Mahathir bin Mohamad. Their opinions regarding the debate will come through in the analysis where they represent two different perspectives on human rights, i.e. universalism and relativism/culture relativism. After the analysis I discuss how an even greater consensus on international human rights would develop and if there is a possibility for a decline of an international consensus.I have come to the conclusion that the arguments from both sides of the spectrum have put forward key arguments in this study that are of great importance for the future cooperation between cultures. The study shows that a greater consensus (and therefore greater respect for human rights?) can be created if we develop an international platform for discussion of cultural differences and I have also come to the conclusion that we probably won’t see a decline of the consensus surrounding human rights but rather a development of them.

This study investigates the challenges to the legitimacy and authority of scientific research in late modern philosophy of science. The author suggests that the different challenges to the legitimacy of science have led to relativism and amount to a crisis. Keeping in mind the positivist background, he illustrates the legitimacy crisis of science in the period from Popper to the present. In particular his analysis focuses on the "historical school" (Kuhn, Feyerabend etc.) in philosophy of science. The main question of this study is: what are the causes and the nature of the legitimacy crisis emerging in the contemporary philosophical assessment of science? To answer this question, a few specific challenges to the legitimacy of science emerging in particular areas are analysed: for example the difficulties of anchoring scientific certitude to its proper object of study, the loss of objectivity, growing scepticism about the possibility of communication and scientific progress. After substantiating the gradual emergence of relativist and sceptical approaches in the abovementioned areas, this study provides a "diagnosis" aiming at identifying the causes of the crisis. The humanist ground motive of nature and freedom and the choice of anchoring scientific certainty either in the subject or in the object of knowledge are considered the main sources of the crisis. They lead to arbitrary absolutisations of particular aspects of the scientific enterprise and (in the case of subjectivist approaches) to sceptical approaches to the possibility of scientific objectivity, communication and progress. This study also indicates a few possible resources, available in the reformational tradition, to counteract the legitimacy crisis of science. The main resource indicated in this study is the recognition of the structural order for reality, which is accessible to scientific analysis, "constrains" scientific research but also constitutes a common ground for researchers. Other important resources are the recognition of the link between scientific and pre-scientific knowledge and the acknowledgment that universality and individuality are traits of everything that exists. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Philosophy))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2007.

Esta dissertação investiga, por meio de uma leitura imanente da filosofia de Nietzsche, a relação problemática entre perspectivismo e relativismo em sua obra. Inscrito na efetividade, concebida como vontades de potência que se exercem de modo perspectivístico e interpretante, o perspectivismo propõe a ideia de que não existem fatos, mas apenas interpretações perspectivísticas. Cumpre então perguntar se tal perspectivismo incorreria num relativismo radical, segundo o qual todas as interpretações seriam equivalentes. Procuraremos mostrar que não é possível responder a esse problema de modo unilateral, com um simples e taxativo sim ou não. Por um lado, o exame de seus escritos indica que Nietzsche não pretenderia assumir a posição de um relativista radical na medida em que hierarquiza as interpretações e reivindica a superioridade de sua própria interpretação de mundo. Mais do que isso, sua filosofia aponta até mesmo para a inviabilização daquele relativismo: ao associar os conceitos de perspectiva e interpretação ao de valor, indica que toda perspectiva e toda interpretação avaliam e hierarquizam, de modo que inexistiriam perspectivas e interpretações que efetivamente considerassem as demais como dotadas de mesmo valor. Por outro lado, se admitida a concepção de uma efetividade perspectivística e interpretativa, então todo e qualquer critério estabelecido para hierarquizar as interpretações teria de ser relativo a uma perspectiva e a uma interpretação determinadas, não consistindo num critério incondicionado e objetivo. Assim, uma vez considerada a relatividade de todo critério, ressurge o problema do relativismo. / This dissertation researches, through an immanent reading of Nietzsches philosophy, the problematic relationship between perspectivism and relativism in his work. Intrinsic in the reality, conceived as wills to power that express themselves in a perspectivist and interpretive way, the perspectivism argues that there are no facts, but only perspectivist interpretations. So it is necessary to ask whether such a perspectivism incur a radical relativism, according to which all interpretations would be equivalent. We shall try to show that it is not possible to answer this problem unilaterally, with a simple yes or no. On the one hand, the examination of his writings indicates that Nietzsche would not intend to take the position of a radical relativist, for he ranks the interpretations and claims the superiority of his own interpretation of the world. More than that, his philosophy would point to the impossibility of that relativism: since Nietzsche associates the concepts of perspective and interpretation with the concept of value, he indicates that every perspective and every interpretation evaluate and rank, so that there would not be perspectives and interpretations that effectively could consider the others as equivalent. On the other hand, if we accept the conception of a perspectivist and interpretive reality, so any criterion fixed in order to rank the interpretations would depend on a certain perspective and interpretation, and thus it would not be an unconditional and objective one. Hence, since we consider that any criterion is relative, the problem concerning relativism resurfaces.

This dissertation created a model to explore the effect of dominant group status on stigmatization of mental illness and on moral relativism and the interactive effect of dominant group status on stigmatization of mental illness through moral relativism. The model was conceptualized according to social dominance theory. Latent variables were created to measure moral relativism and stigmatization of mental illness. The latent measures were conceptualized according to current theories in the fields of moral relativism and stigmatization. During statistical analyses the latent measure for moral relativism was found to be unreliable. The study then became confirmatory-exploratory in nature by first comparing the fit indices of three alternate models with single-measure latent variables. The model that best fit the data was then used to conclude the exploratory research on the effect of group status on moral relativism and stigmatization of mental illness. The model was not supported by the data based on fit index and standardized residual scores.

劉熙賢. / 論文 (哲學碩士)--香港中文大學, 1997. / 參考文獻 (leaves 95-97). / Liu Xixian. / Lun wen (zhe xue shuo shi)-- Xianggang Zhong wen da xue, 1997. / Can kao wen xian (leaves 95-97). / Chapter 第一章 --- 麥肯泰爾的德性理論 --- p.1 / Chapter 1. --- 導言 --- p.1 / Chapter 2. --- 德性與實踐 --- p.4 / Chapter 3. --- 敘述：行爲的歷史性格 --- p.7 / Chapter 4. --- 傳統文化的傳貽 --- p.10 / Chapter 第二章 --- 傳統與相對主義 --- p.14 / Chapter 1. --- 《誰之公正？何種理性？》的理論架構 --- p.14 / Chapter 2. --- 傳統與創建傳統的三個階段 --- p.16 / Chapter 3. --- 傳統與相對主義 --- p.20 / Chapter 4. --- 相對主義 --- p.24 / Chapter 5. --- 「知識論危機」 --- p.26 / Chapter 6. --- 批評 --- p.31 / Chapter 第三章 --- 可譯性與跨文化翻譯 --- p.38 / Chapter 1. --- 小引 --- p.38 / Chapter 2. --- 爲何討論翻譯理論？ --- p.40 / Chapter 3. --- 翻譯正名 --- p.45 / Chapter 4. --- 譯事之難 --- p.47 / Chapter 5. --- 本土與異文化：近代翻譯理論的啓示 --- p.54 / Chapter 6. --- 從名詞的翻譯論不可譯之因由 --- p.64 / Chapter 第四章 --- 從相對主義到可譯性 --- p.67 / Chapter 1. --- 「最難駁的相對主義」 --- p.67 / Chapter 2. --- 三種「不可翻譯性」 --- p.71 / Chapter 3. --- 文化沙文主義 --- p.75 / Chapter 4. --- 整理與批評 --- p.78 / Chapter 5. --- 結論 --- p.90 / 參考書目 --- p.95

The purpose of this descriptive study was to determine how the concept of "cultural relativism" is used in the current literature pertaining to intercultural communication. This concept is central to much of the work being done on face-to-face intercultural communication, but a preliminary review of that literature indicated ambiguity and lack of concurrence among authors' views regarding the concept. This research was designed to describe the range of authors' views on cultural relativism as well as to provide some historical and critical perspective regarding "cultural relativism."

This thesis will explain in detail two closely related but jointly defensible moral realist positions. I show how each position responds to the initial dilemma of whether moral judgments are propositions. Following this discussion, I defend this combined position against an objection that the position is inherently contradictory. I conclude that one can coherently maintain both positions without a contradiction.

Uppsatsen har för avsikt att ur en filosofisk ansats försöka åskådliggöra teoretiska och tankemässiga komplikationer mellan kunskapssynen i läroplanen för de frivilliga skolformerna och det traditionella klassrummets fysiska och upplevda miljö. Detta för att pröva ansatsens möjligheter vid framtida teoretiska och empiriska studier. Uppsatsen vill därför dels ta reda på vad läroplanen och dess beredningsarbete föreskriver för typ av kunskapsundervisning, dels undersöka hur läroplanen och dess beredningsarbete resonerar kring kunskap. För att nå en djupare förståelse för läroplanens formuleringar i detta avseende, lägger jag ett utvecklingsperspektiv på samhälle, skola och kunskap. Analysen visar att skolans kunskapsuppgift är tudelad. Läroplanen och dess beredningsarbete föreskriver dels en kunskapssyn där kunskaper ges, förmedlas, tillägnas och används – detta är den mimetiska kunskapen som utgår från en syn på eleven som konsument, dels som en aktivitet där kunskapen utvecklas, skapas eller kunskapas – kunskapens transformativa sida, där eleven blir producent. Läroplanens kunskapssyn har i detta perspektiv åtskilliga inslag av postmodern teori; de uppträder ur ett betraktande av kunskaper som relativa, konstruktiva och konstextuella vilka hos eleverna skall utvecklas och skapas, men också i former som fakta, förståelse, färdighet och förtrogenhet – berättelser och myter som ej har något inneboende sanningsvärde utan som snarare skapats som sociala och kulturella produkter och som skolan har ett uppdrag att förmedla. Jag finner att föreställningen om det traditionella klassrummets fysiska miljö ur ett livsvärldsfenomenologiskt perspektiv främst är skapad för att främja skolverksamhetens mimetiska sida, där undervisningen baseras på en reproduktion av kunskap snarare än produktion. Det traditionella klassrummet blockerar utvecklandet av transformativ kunskap och i grund och botten blir utbildning och skolans livsvärld därför demokratisk fråga.

This thesis is a broad survey of the uses of ambiguity in academic discourse. I note the uses of ambiguity in literary criticism, linking ambiguity with epistemic relativism. Then I pose the question, is the notion of "reframing" in psychotherapy analogous to the concept of "spin" in propaganda, advertising and public relations? In a consideration of theories that posit the social construction of reality, I examine articles by Judith Butler and Ian Hacking, noting the ambiguous reception of performativity and nominalism, respectively, within academia. In 1996 a physicist named Alan Sokal published an article which argued that reality is a social and linguistic construct. Sokal later revealed that his article was actually an elaborate spoof of postmodernist and social constructionist writing. According to Sokal, such relativistic discourse erodes the distinction between fact and fiction. I look at the implications of Sokal's hoax for the social sciences and humanities.