Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBermúdez-Rey, Juan Pablo
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-26T00:05:10Z
dc.date.available2019-09-26T00:05:10Z
dc.date.created2017-10-27 23:04
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifieroai:philpapers.org/rec/BERLNY
dc.identifierhttps://philpapers.org/rec/BERLNY
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/614276
dc.description.abstractThis paper investigates the differences between ancient Greek and modern ethical naturalism, through the account of the whole classical tradition provided by Cicero in De finibus bonorum et malorum. Ever since Hume’s remarks on the topic, it is usually held that derivations of normative claims from factual claims require some kind of proper justification. It ́s a the presence of such justifications in the Epicurean, Stoic, and Academic-Peripatetic ethical theories (as portrayed in De finibus), and, after a negative conclusion, I argue that we should conceive of this issue within a social-historical perspective: The radical difference between ancient and modern naturalistic ethics is due (in Weber’s terms) to the rationalization processes that generated the modern outlook on nature.
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectPhilosophy
dc.titleNature and the Good: An exploration of ancient ethical naturalism in Cicero’s De finibus
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
ge.collectioncodeGA
ge.dataimportlabelOAI metadata object
ge.identifier.legacyglobethics:11814409
ge.identifier.permalinkhttps://www.globethics.net/gel/11814409
ge.lastmodificationdate2017-10-27 23:04
ge.lastmodificationuseradmin@pointsoftware.ch (import)
ge.submissions0
ge.oai.exportid149453
ge.oai.repositoryid4212
ge.oai.streamid2
ge.setnameGlobeEthicsLib
ge.setspecglobeethicslib
ge.linkhttps://philpapers.org/rec/BERLNY


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record