22 found
Order:
  1.  37
    Adrian M. S. Piper, The Money Pump Is Necessarily Diachronic. Adrian Piper Research Archive Foundation Berlin/Philosophy.
    In “The Irrelevance of the Diachronic Money-Pump Argument for Acyclicity,” The Journal of Philosophy CX, 8 (August 2013), 460-464, Johan E. Gustafsson contends that if Davidson, McKinsey and Suppes’ diachronic money-pump argument in their "Outlines of a Formal Theory of Value, I," Philosophy of Science 22 (1955), 140-160 is valid, so is the synchronic argument Gustafsson himself offers. He concludes that the latter renders irrelevant diachronic choice considerations in general, and the two best-known diachronic solutions to the money pump problem (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  18
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1991). Impartiality, Compassion, and Modal Imagination. Ethics 101 (4):726-757.
    We need modal imagination in order to extend our conception of reality - and, in particular, of human beings - beyond our immediate experience in the indexical present; and we need to do this in order to preserve the significance of human interaction. To make this leap of imagination successfully is to achieve not only insight but also an impartial perspective on our own and others' inner states. This perspective is a necessary condition of experiencing compassion for others. This is (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  3.  38
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1987). Moral Theory and Moral Alienation. Journal of Philosophy 84 (2):102-118.
    Most moral theories share certain features in common with other theories. They consist of a set of propositions that are universal, general, and hence impartial. The propositions that constitute a typical moral theory are (1) universal, in that they apply to all subjects designated as within their scope. They are (2) general, in that they include no proper names or definite descriptions. They are therefore (3) impartial, in that they accord no special privilege to any particular agent's situation which cannot (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  4.  63
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1978). Utility, Publicity, and Manipulation. Ethics 88 (3):189-206.
    In our dealings with young children, we often get them to do or think things by arranging their environments in certain ways; by dissembling, simplifying, or ambiguating the facts in answer to their queries; by carefully selecting the states of affairs, behavior of others, and utterances to which they shall be privy. We rightly justify these practices by pointing out a child's malleability, and the necessity of paying close attention to formative influences during its years of growth. This filtering of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  6
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1987). Personal Continuity and Instrumental Rationality in Rawls' Theory of Justice. Social Theory and Practice 13 (1):49-76.
    I want to examine the implications of a metaphysical thesis which is presupposed in various objections to Rawls' theory of justice.Although their criticisms differ in many respects, they concur in employing what I shall refer to as the continuity thesis. This consists of the following claims conjointly: (1) The parties in the original position (henceforth the OP) are, and know themselves to be, fully mature persons who will be among the members of the well-ordered society (henceforth the WOS) which is (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  6.  60
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1997). Kant on the Objectivity of the Moral Law (1994). In Andrews Reath, Barbara Herman & Christine Korsgaard (eds.), Reclaiming the History of Ethics: Essays for John Rawls. Cambridge University Press
    In 1951 John Rawls expressed these convictions about the fundamental issues in metaethics: [T]he objectivity or the subjectivity of moral knowledge turns, not on the question whether ideal value entities exist or whether moral judgments are caused by emotions or whether there is a variety of moral codes the world over, but simply on the question: does there exist a reasonable method for validating and invalidating given or proposed moral rules and those decisions made on the basis of them? For (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  56
    Adrian M. S. Piper (2009). Intuition and Concrete Particularity in Kant's Transcendental Aesthetic. In Francis Halsall, Julia Jansen & Tony O'Connor (eds.), Rediscovering Aesthetics: Transdisciplinary Voices From Art History, Philosophy, and Art Practice. Stanford University Press
    By transcendental aesthetic, Kant means “the science of all principles of a priori sensibility” (A 21/B 35). These, he argues, are the laws that properly direct our judgments of taste (B 35 – 36 fn.), i.e. our aesthetic judgments as we ordinarily understand that notion in the context of contemporary art. Thus the first part of the Critique of Pure Reason, entitled the Transcendental Aesthetic, enumerates the necessary presuppositions of, among other things, our ability to make empirical judgments about particular (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  52
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1993). Xenophobia and Kantian Rationalism. Philosophical Forum 24 (1-3):188-232.
    The purpose of this discussion is twofold. First, I want to shed some light on Kant's concept of personhood as rational agency, by situating it in the context of the first Critique's conception of the self as defined by its rational dispositions. I hope to suggest that this concept of personhood cannot be simply grafted onto an essentially Humean conception of the self that is inherently inimical to it, as I believe Rawls, Gewirth, and others have tried to do. Instead (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9.  2
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1986). Goods and Virtues by Michael Slote. Journal of Philosophy 83 (8):468-473.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10.  6
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1991). “Seeing Things”. Southern Journal of Philosophy 29 (S1):29-60.
    In an earlier discussion, I argued that Kant's moral theory satisfies some of the basic criteria for being a genuine theory: it includes testable hypotheses, nomological higher-and lower-level laws, theoretical constructs, internal principles, and bridge principles. I tried to show that Kant's moral theory is an ideal, descriptive deductive-nomological theory that explains the behavior of a fully rational being and generates testable hypotheses about the moral behavior of actual agents whom we initially assume to conform to its theoretical constructs. I (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  11.  5
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1986). Instrumentalism, Objectivity, and Moral Justification. American Philosophical Quarterly 23 (4):373 - 381.
    I want to examine critically a certain strategy of moral justification which I shall call instrumentalism. By this I mean the view that a moral theory is rationally justified if the actions, life-plan, or set of social arrangements it prescribes can be shown to be the best means to the achievement of an agent's final ends, whatever these may be. Instrumentalism presupposes a commitment to what I shall call the Humean conception of the self. By this I mean a certain (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  12.  19
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1982). A Distinction Without a Difference. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 7 (1):403-435.
    I wish to defend the claim that given the content and structure of any moral theory we are likely to find palatable, there is no way of uniquely breaking down that theory into either consequentialist or deontological elements. Indeed, once we examine the actual structure of any such theory more closely, we see that it can be classified in either way arbitrarily. Hence if we ignore the metaethical pronouncements often made by adherents of the consequentialist-deontological distinction, we are quickly led (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  14
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1980). Property and the Limits of the Self. Political Theory 8 (1):39-64.
    THE MAIN OBJECTIVES of the following discussions are, first, to show the logical inconsistency of Hegel’s theory of the necessity of private property and, second, to show its exegetical inconsistency with the most plausible and consistent interpretations of Hegel’s theory of the self and its relation to the state in Ethical Life. I begin with the latter objective, by distinguishing three basic conceptions of the self that can be gleaned from various passages in the Philosophy of Right. I suggest viable (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  15
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1985). Critical Hegemony and Aesthetic Acculturation. Noûs 19 (1):29-40.
    There is a broad consensus, within the interlocking system of art institutions, on the goals viewed as worth achieving. Artists, for example, will strive to realize broadly formalist values in their work; critics will strive to discern and articulate the achievement of such values; dealers will strive to discover and promote artists whose work successfully reflects these standards; and collectors will strive to acquire and exchange such work.The long-range effect of this tightly defended consensus is that the art practitioners who (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  6
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1988). Hume on Rational Final Ends. Philosophy Research Archives 14:193-228.
    Historically, the view, prevalent in contemporary economics and decision theory as well as philosophy, that rational action consists simply in satisfying one’s desires, whatever they may be, as efficiently as possible, is to be found first in Book II of Hume’s Treatise of Human Nature. This view has counterintuitive and self-refuting implications, in that it recognizes as rational behavior that may reveal a clear degree of irresponsibility or psychological instability. Accordingly, many Hume scholars have tried to show recently that this (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  8
    Adrian M. S. Piper (1996). Making Sense of Value. Ethics 106 (3):525-537.
    A book review of Elizabeth Anderson, Value in Ethics and Economics (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1993). I will pass over her compelling critiques of cost-benefit analysis, rational desire theory, and "consequentialist" moral theories, among many topics she dispatches successfully, with fierce intelligence and wit. Instead I want to focus on the central justificatory strategy that underpins her defense of her pluralist, nonconsequentialist, rational attitude theory of value. Anderson states at the outset that she is not that interested in such (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17.  4
    Adrian M. S. Piper (2012). Kant's Two Solutions to the Free Rider Problem. Kant Yearbook 4 (1).
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  5
    Sue Weinberg, Joshua Cohen, Adrian M. S. Piper, Linda Nicholson & Alison Jaggar (2001). Marcia Lind, 1951-2000. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 75 (2):118 - 121.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19.  0
    Adrian M. S. Piper (2015). In Memoriam: Edward Francis McClennen II, 16 August 1936–2 November 2013. Critical Inquiry 41 (2):491-498.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20.  0
    Adrian M. S. Piper (2013). Practical Action – First Critique Foundations. In Margit Ruffing, Claudio La Rocca, Alfredo Ferrarin & Stefano Bacin (eds.), Kant Und Die Philosophie in Weltbürgerlicher Absicht: Akten des Xi. Kant-Kongresses 2010. De Gruyter 495-538.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. Adrian M. S. Piper (2008). Rationality and the Structure of the Self, Volume I: The Humean Conception. APRA Foundation Berlin.
    The Humean conception of the self consists in the belief-desire model of motivation and the utility-maximizing model of rationality. This conception has dominated Western thought in philosophy and the social sciences ever since Hobbes’ initial formulation in Leviathan and Hume’s elaboration in the Treatise of Human Nature. Bentham, Freud, Ramsey, Skinner, Allais, von Neumann and Morgenstern and others have added further refinements that have brought it to a high degree of formal sophistication. Late twentieth century moral philosophers such as Rawls, (...)
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  16
    Adrian M. S. Piper (2013). Volume II: A Kantian Conception. APRA Foundation.
    Adrian Piper argues that the Humean conception can be made to work only if it is placed in the context of a wider and genuinely universal conception of the self, whose origins are to be found in Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. This conception comprises the basic canons of classical logic, which provide both a model of motivation and a model of rationality. These supply necessary conditions both for the coherence and integrity of the self and also for unified agency. (...)
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography