http___livro-ensino-medio.f1cf.com.br_filosofia_hr_philosophy-284.html_1.xml
1.1 2.1 3.1 4.1 5.1 6.1 7.1 8.1 9.1 10.1 11.1 12.1 14.1 15.1 16.1 17.1 18.1 19.1 20.1 22.1 23.1 24.1 25.1 26.1 28.1 29.1 30.1 31.1 32.1 33.1 34.1
not agree that absolute moral standards are possible, metaphysical, based purely on reason. Just an agreement between citizens on the moral qualities, based on utility and pleasure they provide is ensuring the validity of the rules. And it also takes this judgment to judgments of taste. In judgments of taste Hume also points to the idea of consensus. And it demonstrates the difficulty of reaching this common idea and insecurity in completing any idea about the final and absolute beauty. He finds the great variety and difference of tastes and opinions, even among individuals of the same culture and who have had the same education. The philosopher points out that they are not judged tastes strange, as barbarians. Barbarian can also be our judgment on that which is different. It can not be tempted to consider only beautiful preferences of certain people or cultures, ie, this search for a standardization of taste can not mean the mutilation of the right to dissent and freedom of choice. This diversity of tastes is more obvious, according to Hume, in rea lity, at the individual and particular than in terms of appearances, speeches about broader issues. On the ground of morality, for example, hardly anyone would disagree that "... justice, humanitarianism, prudence and truth ..." were not worthy of applause, and the ideas contrary to them are worthy of reproach. This unanimity would be the result of reason that underlies the moral, or the feelings that move human actions? According to Hume, this agreement is much more the result of language: the words themselves bring their language the sense of disapproval or approval: "The people who invented the word charity, and used it in a much clearer and more effective to inculcate the precept be thou charitable than any pretended legislator or prophet that includes this maxim in his writings "(Ibid, p. 57). The problem of achieving unanimity on ethics touches on the question of language, to the extent that the terms are used in different ways in different languages. Likewise the issue of judgments of taste. Some works of art are recognized as beautiful just as a matter of custom, culturally assigned value, but do not guarantee their real beauty, and therefore a unanimous aesthetic judgments. Contrary to the difficulty of finding a single pattern, Hume recognizes that natural look for a pattern, "... a rule able to reconcile the various opinions of men ..." Although this pattern is likely on the horizon, it is not possible for Hume. Primarily because the feeling we have in relation to a work is different from the trial we utter it. The feeling is always the individual, has no reference to anything different from him. When I say I like this or that, the taste is mine, can not take Philosophy Marble sculpture. Michelangelo. It is said that it is impossible not to be moved before this sculpture, which is in the Vatican. The expressive force, the details, give the impression that, indeed, there is life, there is movement and emotion seems to sprout from the stone. The commotion in front of a work of art, happen to anyone, under any circumstances, or it is only for certain crops or situations? An American Indian or an Oriental feel the same thing on a European this work? http://www.abcgallery.com
1.1 2.1 3.1 4.1 5.1 6.1 7.1 8.1 9.1 10.1 11.1 12.1 14.1 15.1 16.1 17.1 18.1 19.1 20.1 22.1 23.1 24.1 25.1 26.1 28.1 29.1 30.1 31.1 32.1 33.1 34.1
Ne slažu da je apsolutni moralni standardi su moguće, metafizičko, temelji se isključivo na razumu. Samo sporazum između građana o moralnim kvalitetama, na temelju korisnosti i užitka koje pružaju se osiguranje valjanosti pravila. I to također uzima ovu presudu na presude ukusu. U presudama ukusu Hume također ukazuje na ideju konsenzusa. I to pokazuje poteškoće u postizanju ovog zajedničku ideju i nesigurnost u popunjavanju bilo kakvu ideju o konačnom i apsolutna ljepota. On pronalazi veliku raznolikost i razliku okusa i mišljenja, čak i među pojedincima iste kulture i koji su imali isto obrazovanje. Filozof ističe da oni nisu suđeni okusa čudno, kao barbare. Divljak također može biti naša prosudba o tome što je drugačije. To ne može biti u iskušenju da razmislite samo lijepe želje i sklonosti pojedinih naroda ili kulture, odnosno, to potraga za standardizaciju ukusu ne može značiti sakaćenje prava na neslaganja i slobodi izbora. Ova raznolikost okusa više je nego očita, prema Hume, u rea nosti, na individualnoj i naročito nego u smislu nastupa, govora o širim pitanjima. Na temelju morala, primjerice, malo tko bi se slažete da je "... pravda, humanost, razboritost i istina ..." nisu bili dostojni pljeskom i ideje suprotno njima su vrijedni prijekora. To će biti jednoglasna rezultat razloga leži u osnovi moralno, ili osjećaje koji pokreću ljudska akcije? Prema Hume, ovaj sporazum je mnogo više rezultat jeziku: riječi i sami donijeti njihov jezik je osjećaj neodobravanja ili odobravanja: "Narod koji je izumio riječ ljubav, i to se koristi u puno jasniji i učinkovitiji uliti propis budi dobrotvorna nego bilo tobožnjoj zakonodavcu ili proroku koji uključuje ovu maksimu u njegovim djelima "(Ibid., str. 57). Problem postizanja jednoglasnost o etici dotiče pitanje jezika, do te mjere da su pojmovi koji se koriste na različite načine u različitim jezicima. Isto pitanje presuda ukusa. Neke umjetnine su prepoznali kao lijepe kao što je običaj, kulturno dodijeljena vrijednost, ali ne jamči njihovu pravu ljepotu, a time i jednoglasnom estetske prosudbe. Suprotno poteškoća u pronalaženju jedan uzorak, Hume priznaje da je prirodni izgled za uzorak, "... pravilo u stanju pomiriti različita mišljenja o ljudima ..." Iako je ovaj uzorak je vjerojatno na vidiku, to nije moguće za Hume. Prvenstveno jer imamo osjećaj u odnosu na djelu je različit od suđenja smo ga izgovoriti. Osjećaj je uvijek individualna, nema pozivanje na bilo što drugo od njega. Kada kažem volim ovo ili ono, okus je moj, ne može se Filozofija Mramor skulptura. Michelangelo. On je rekao da je nemoguće ne treba premjestiti prije ove skulpture, koja je u Vatikanu. Izražajne snage, detalji, daju dojam da je, štoviše, postoji život, postoji pokret i emocija čini da mladica iz kamena. Komešanje ispred umjetničkog djela, dogoditi da bilo tko, pod kojim uvjetima, ili je to samo za određene kulture ili situacije? Američki Indijanac ili orijentalni osjećaju istu stvar na Europskom ovom poslu? http://www.abcgallery.com