Suchergebnisse

First published in 1977 this book is both expository and critical and concentres on Hobbes' ethical and political theory, but also considering the effect on these of his metaphysics. Updated, with a new preface especially for this re-issue, which brings together recent scholarship on Hobbes, a particular useful feature of the book is the new, critical bibliography

Logic of morals. The meaning of a logic of morals ; Logic of moral principles ; Logic of moral concepts ; Justice ; Logic of morals and metaphysic of morals -- Metaphysic of morals. A theory of moral obligation ; Epistemology and ethics ; Policies of conduct ; Ethics and science : the problem of freewill.

The eminent philosopher D. D. Raphael presents the culmination of a lifetime's study of the development of the idea of justice, from the ancient world to the late twentieth century. His aim is not just historical but philosophical: to illuminate our understanding of justice. His original approach to the subject draws not only on classic texts by such philosophers as Plato, Aristotle, Hume, Mill, and Rawls, but also on the Bible and Greek tragedy, and some neglectedbut important thinkers in the modern era. Lucid and stimulating, Concepts of Justice can be enjoyed by anyone interested in moral and political thought.

DR KING AND PROFESSOR CRICK ARE BOTH MAINLY CONCERNED TO discuss the concept of tolerance as the deliberate acceptance of what is disapproved. They wish to reserve the use of the word 'toleration' for a variation upon this general idea, but their proposals are not quite the same. Dr King wants to use 'toleration' as 'a label for those ideas, doctrines, ideologies or movements' which have opposed specific types of intolerance. The dictionary label for this is 'tolerationism'. Toleration is what the ideas, doctrines, etc. advocate; it is not a label for the ideas and doctrines themselves. Professor Crick, at the beginning of his paper, says that he too will use the word 'toleration' for 'theories or doctrines' which advocate a form of tolerance. But his actual usage later on suggests that he did not intend the word to mean the theories or doctrines; rather that he proposed to say a doctrine was a doctrine of toleration if it advocated a certain kind of tolerance. His distinction between 'tolerance' and 'toleration' is intended to restrict 'toleration' to tolerance in general, tolerance of wide classes of action, and not to use it for tolerance of one specific type, e.g. tolerance of religious worship (which is how it is in fact used in the Act of Toleration and in Locke's Letter Concerning Toleration).