Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "rorty" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
    Wyświetlanie 1-3 z 3
    Tytuł:
    Filozofia a etyka stosowana. Dyskusja nad propozycją Richarda Rorty`ego
    Philosophy and Applied Ethics. Discussion on the R. Rorty’s Statement
    Autorzy:
    Kamińska, Gabriela
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/964260.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2008-05-15
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
    Tematy:
    Richard Rorty
    ethics
    business ethics
    philosophy
    Opis:
    In this article the relations between philosophy and applied ethics are considered. The presented deliberation is concentrated on the question whether philosophy has contributed to applied ethics, especially to business ethics. Trying to find an answer to this question I will refer to the discussion which was started by R. Rorty in which he presented his own point of view on the issues related to moral development and the role of philosophy and philosophers in the modern world. Rorty points at proper tools which, in his opinion, can be helpful to business ethicists and formulates the goal they should try to aim at. His opinions has started a vivid discussion. Patricia H. Werhane, Daryl Koehn and Richard T. De George try to discuss with Rorty’s statement. They oppose Rorty’s argument that philosophy is not more relevant to applied ethics than any other academic disciplines. They point to the facts which document philosophers’ contribution in forming business ethics. This article presents their arguments as well as an attempt of their critical assessment.
    Źródło:
    Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym; 2008, 11, 1
    1899-2226
    2353-4869
    Pojawia się w:
    Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Philosophical difficulties of stakeholder theory
    Autorzy:
    Soin, Maciej
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/653156.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2018
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
    Tematy:
    stakeholder theory
    pragmatism
    facts and values
    Freeman
    Rorty
    Opis:
    Philosophical difficulties of stakeholder theory-which plays an important role in CSR and business ethics-are mainly connected to the questions of its status and justification. What sense does stakeholder theory have: descriptive, instrumental or normative? And if normative, why then should executives worry about multiple stakeholder demands? It is well known that Freeman, one of the most important authors of stakeholder theory, deliberately disregarded these problems. In philosophical questions, he invoked Rorty’s pragmatism that in his opinion effectively undermined the “positivistic” dichotomy between facts and values, science and ethics, and enabled stakeholder theory to be understood as both descriptive and normative. The article presents some difficulties connected with this view, focusing on its dubious assumptions and unfavourable consequences. These assumptions contain a false dilemma, taken from Rorty, which states that knowledge follows either a rule of representation or a rule of solidarity. One of the unfavourable consequences is the conclusion that stakeholder theory may be true only if its followers are able to force the stakeholders to accept its truthfulness. The main thesis of the article says that, because of pragmatic justification, stakeholder theory became a sort of arbitrary narration, which is unable to deal with its (empirical) misuses. However, a more traditional view on facts and values enables us to appreciate the descriptive advantages of the theory and to identify difficulties connected with its normative layer. From this point of view, the attempt at a pragmatic interpretation of stakeholder theory was a misunderstanding that should be withdrawn from circulation.
    Źródło:
    Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym; 2018, 21, 7; 75-84
    1899-2226
    2353-4869
    Pojawia się w:
    Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Filozoficzne trudności teorii interesariuszy
    Philosophical Difficulties of Stakeholder Theory
    Autorzy:
    Soin, Maciej
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/965198.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2016-09-15
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
    Tematy:
    stakeholder theory
    pragmatism
    facts and values
    Freeman
    Rorty
    A13
    L21
    M14
    Opis:
    Philosophical difficulties of stakeholder theory – which plays an important role in CSR and business ethics – are connected first of all with questions of its status and justification. What sense does stakeholder theory have: descriptive, instrumental or normative? And if normative, why then should executives worry about multiple stakeholder demands? It is well known that Freeman, one of the most important authors of stakeholder theory, deliberately disregarded these problems. In philosophical questions he invoked Rorty’s pragmatism, which in his opinion effectively undermined the “positivistic” dichotomy between facts and values, science and ethics, and enabled stakeholder theory to be understood at the same time as both descriptive and normative. The article presents some difficulties connected with this view, focusing on its dubious assumptions and unfavourable consequences. To the assumptions belongs a false dilemma taken from Rorty, which states that knowledge follows either a rule of representation or a rule of solidarity. One of the unfavourable consequences is the conclusion that stakeholder theory may be true only if its followers are able to force the stakeholders to accept its truthfulness. The main thesis of the article says that, as a result of pragmatic justification, stakeholder theory became a sort of arbitrary narration, which is unable to deal with its (empirical) misuses. However, a return to a more traditional view on facts and values enables us to appreciate the descriptive advantages of the theory and to identify difficulties connected with its normative layer. From this point of view, the attempt at a pragmatic interpretation of stakeholder theory was a misunderstanding that should be withdrawn from circulation.
    Źródło:
    Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym; 2016, 19, 3
    1899-2226
    2353-4869
    Pojawia się w:
    Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
      Wyświetlanie 1-3 z 3

      Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies