Pragmatism Without Metaphysics?

Vol.29,No.4(2021)

Tomáš Sobek

https://doi.org/10.5817/CPVP2021-4-7

PDF (Čeština)
Abstract
This article has two parts that are closely related. Both concern the relationship between metaphysics and pragmatism in a moral context. The first responds to Marek Káčer’s text „Why bother with the question of the existence of human rights?“ which advocates pragmatism in opposition to the ontological approach. Káčer, inspired by Rudolf Carnap, argues that the ontological question of whether X exists should be replaced by the practical question of whether it is useful to accept a language framework that allows to talk about X. In my reaction I will try to show that the opposition between the ontological and pragmatic approach is not as sharp as the author presents it. The very idea of what could and should be creates ontological commitments. I will try to illustrate this fact on the desire for fairness in relation to the moral concept of potential person. Ontological commitments are an integral part of human’s practical orientation in the world, and in this sense the ontological approach is compatible with pragmatism. The second part responds to another text by the same author, which also deals with the role of metaphysics in the justification of human rights. Káčer here uses Hume’s dictum to show the limited relevance of metaphysics to the justification of human rights. I am trying to show that Hume’s dictum, in its non-trivial version, is a metaphysical thesis rather than a logical law. However, I propose a way to deal with this problem in terms of Káčer’s pragmatism.


Keywords:
Ontological Commitments; Pragmatism; Person in Moral Sense; Actual Person; Potentional Person; Fairness; Normativity; Hume’s Dictum.

Pages:
825–834
References

ALEXY, Robert. Menschenrechte ohne Metaphysik? In Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 2004, roč. 52, č. 1, 2004. DOI https://doi.org/10.1524/dzph.2004.52.1.15

ALEXY, Robert. Normativity, Metaphysics and Decision, In: BERTEA, Stefano a George PAVLAKOS (eds.). New Essays on the Normativity of Law. Hart Publishing, 2011.

ALEXY, Robert. Law, Morality, and the Existence of Human Rights. Ratio Juris, 2012, roč. 25, č. 1, 2012. DOi https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9337.2011.00499.x

ASPREM, Egil. The problem of disenchantment. Brill, 2014. DOI https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004254947

BAUER, Nathan a David SVOLBA. Justice at the Margins: The Social Contract and the Challenge of Marginal Cases. In: Southern Journal of Philosophy, 2017, roč. 55, č. 1, s. 51–67. DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/sjp.12209

CAMOSY, Charles Christopher. Peter Singer and Christian ethics: beyond polarization. Cambridge, 2012. DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139043304

CARNAP, Rudolf. Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology (1950). In: BENACERRAF, Paul a Hilary PUTNAM (eds.). The Philosophy of Mathematics: Selected Readings. Cambridge, 1984, s. 241–257.

FELDMAN, Fred. Doing the Best We Can. Dordrecht, 1986. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4570-8

HUME, David. A Treatise of Human Nature (1739–1740). In: SAYRE-MCCORD, G. (ed.). Moral Philosophy. Hackett Publishing Company, 2006. DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/oseo/instance.00046221

KÁČER, Marek. O úlohe metafyziky pri odôvodňovaní ľudských práv. Časopis pro právní vědu a praxi, 2016, roč. 24, č. 3, s. 339–350. DOI https://doi.org/10.5817/CPVP2016-3-2. Dostupné z: https://journals.muni.cz/cpvp/article/view/6152

KÁČER, Marek. Načo sa trápiť s otázkou existencie ľudských práv? Časopis pro právní vědu a praxi, Brno: Právnická fakulta MU, 2020, roč. 28, č. 4, s. 547–564. DOI https://doi.org/10.5817/CPVP2020-4-1. Dostupné z: https://journals.muni.cz/cpvp/article/view/13725

KAGAN, Shelly . What’s Wrong with Speciesism? In: Journal of Applied Philosophy, 2016, roč. 33, č. 1, s. 1–21. DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12164

KNEALE, William a Martha KNEALE. The Development of Logic. Oxford, 1962.

LEHMANN, Hartmut. Die Entzauberung der Welt: Studien zu Themen von Max Weber. Wallstein, 2009.

MAGUIRE, Barry. Grounding the Autonomy of Ethics. In: SHAFER-LANDAU, Russ (ed.). Oxford Studies in Metaethics, 2015, roč. 10, s. 188–216. DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198738695.003.0008

MAGUIRE, Barry a Jack WOODS. Model theory, Hume’s dictum, and the priority of the ethical. In: Ergo, 2015, roč. 1, č. 1, s. 1–22.

RAWLS, John. The Theory of Justice. Harvard, 1971 (1999).

SCHROEDER, Doris. Human Rights and Human Dignity: An Appeal to Separate the Conjoined Twins. In: Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 2012, roč. 15, č. 3, s. 323–335. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-011-9326-3

SINGER, Daniel J. Mind the Is-Ought Gap. In: Journal of Philosophy, 2015, roč. 112, č. 4.

SOBEK, Tomáš. Metaethics of Human Rights: An Expressivist Approach. In: Rechtstheorie, 2019, roč. 50, s. 493–519. DOI https://doi.org/10.3790/rth.50.4.493

STAMOS, David. The myth of universal human rights. Routledge, 2013.

THOMASSON, Amie L. Norms and Necessity. Oxford, 2020. DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190098193.001.0001

WOLTERSTORFF, Nicholas. Why Naturalism Cannot Account for Natural Human Rights. In: CLARK, Kelly James (ed.).The Blackwell Companion to Naturalism. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2016, s. 447–461. DOI https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118657775.ch31

ZIMMERMAN, Michael J. The concept of moral obligation. Cambridge, 1996. DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511624681

Metrics

1

Crossref logo

1

327

Views

200

PDF (Čeština) views

Copyright © 2021 Tomáš Sobek

PDF (Čeština)