Brentano: Value

It is a regrettable feature of this book symposium that it appears only after the book itself. If I could solicit from three outstanding philosophers detailed analyses of substantial portions of the book before publishing it, the book would have been far better. Below, I indicate some of the ways the book would have been better.

Here is a rather difficult two-part question: How may we grasp (a) the nature of reality and (b) the nature of value? As I understand the man, answering this question was the principal, overarching aim of Franz Brentano’s philosophical work. More specifically, he wanted to provide an answer that respected a self-imposed theoretical constraint, namely, that our grasp of a thing’s status as real or as valuable be ultimately grounded in direct encounter with certain aspects of our conscious experience. The (...) purpose of my book Brentano’s Philosophical System: Mind, Being, Value (henceforth, BPS) is to reconstruct Brentano’s attempt to answer his question, present a partial defense of the answer, offer some potential improvements on it, and also point to persistent difficulties it faces. Here I (a) speed-explain Brentano’s self-imposed constraint and its motivation, (b) reconstruct Brentano’s account of the real in light of it, and (c) reconstruct Brentano’s corresponding account of the valuable. These three tasks correspond roughly to BPS’s three parts: ‘Mind,’ ‘Being,’ and ‘Value.’ . (shrink)

European Journal of Philosophy, EarlyView.

This book is a short presentation of the life, thought and work of Franz Brentano. The first part of the book is a biography of Brentano, the second is a description of the ramifications of Brentano's philosophical program, and the third section offers a succinct description of his main works and of his Nachlaß. Résumé: Cet opuscule est une présentation sommaire de la vie, de la pensée et de l'œuvre de Franz Brentano. L'ouvrage est divisé en trois parties. La première (...) partie est une courte présentation de la vie intellectuelle de Brentano, la deuxième est une description des ramifications et de l'unité de son programme philosophique original et très diversifié, et la troisième propose une description succincte de ses principaux ouvrages et de son Nachlaß. L'ouvrage contient également une bibliographie thématique. (shrink)

L'enseignement viennois de Brentano a faconne les philosophies exactes du XXe siecle, au travers de ses eleves Husserl, Meinong, Twardowski, Stumpf, Ehrenfels ou Marty. Si la theorie de l'intentionnalite, l'ontologie et la logique de Brentano ont fait l'objet de discussions approfondies, son anatomie d'une grande variete d'actes mentaux - choisir, hair, juger, percevoir, preferer, remarquer, savoir, sentir, souffrir, toucher, voir - demeure encore trop ignoree. Ce livre est consacre a cette analyse descriptive minutieuse et foisonnante. Outre son interet historique, celle-ci (...) permet de renouveler bon nombre de debats contemporains en philosophie des emotions, en epistemologie, en philosophie du langage, ainsi qu'en philosophie de l'esprit. (shrink)

Mooreans claim that intrinsic goodness is a conceptual primitive. Fitting-attitude theorists object: they say that goodness should be defined in terms of what it is fitting for us to value. The Moorean view is often considered a relic; the fitting-attitude view is increasingly popular. I think this unfortunate. Though the fitting-attitude analysis is powerful, the Moorean view is still attractive. I dedicate myself to the influential arguments marshaled against Moore’s program, including those advanced by Scanlon, Stratton-Lake and Hooker, and Jacobson; (...) I argue that they do not succeed. (shrink)

This paper argues that the view of the emotions put forward by Brentano, and the modifications and refinements of his claims undertaken by his followers, led to the birth of new paradigm in the philosophy of emotion. The paper is structured in four main sections. The first section presents the context in which Brentano’s theory emerged. Section 2 is devoted to Brentano’s three main claims on the emotions, focusing on their intentionality, their dependency on cognitions, and their relation to values. (...) Section 3 offers an overview of the main debates surrounding these claims among the authors belonging to Brentano’s school. The paper concludes by underlining the parallels between views on the emotions put forward by Brentano and his followers and similar claims defended in contemporary analytic philosophy. (shrink)

Wittgenstein’s and Heidegger’s objections against the possibility of a science of aesthetics were influential on different sides of the analytic/continental divide. Heidegger’s anti-scientism leads him to an alētheic view of artworks which precedes and exceeds any possible aesthetic reduction. Wittgenstein also rejects the relevance of causal explanations, psychological or physiological, to aesthetic questions. The main aim of this paper is to compare Heidegger with Wittgenstein, showing that: there are significant parallels to be drawn between Wittgenstein’s and Heidegger’s anti-scientism about aesthetics, (...) and that their anti-scientism leads both towards partly divergent criticisms of what I will call ‘aestheticism’. The divergence is mainly due to a broader metaphilosophical disagreement concerning appeals to ordinary language. Thus situating the two philosophers’ positions facilitates a possible critical dialogue between analytic and continental approaches in aesthetics. (shrink)

According to most substantive axiological theories – theories telling us which things are good and bad – pleasure is nonderivatively good. This seems to imply that it is always good, even when directed towards a bad object, such as another person’s suffering. This implication is accepted by the Mainstream View about misdirected pleasures: it holds that when someone takes pleasure in another person’s suffering, his being pleased is good, although his being pleased by suffering is bad. This view gains some (...) of its popularity from the advantages of an axiological theory that is structured in the way advocated by Brentano. However, I argue that we should reject the Mainstream View, in favour of an alternative suggested by Aristotle: this distinguishes between nonderivative goodness and exceptionless goodness. When it is good, being pleased is good nonderivatively – but it is not always good. The aim of the paper is to show how a Brentano-style theory can be modified to accommodate this alternative view, and how that supports a case for accepting it. (shrink)

Brentano et Husserl reconnurent tous deux que certaines de nos intentionnalités posent des enjeux normatifs. Seulement, Brentano croyait que les intentionnalités ne peuvent être qualifiées normativement que si elles sont incompatibles avec une autre façon opposée de se rapporter intentionnellement à un même objet. Husserl insista pour sa part sur le fait qu’il n’y a des enjeux normatifs que là où il y a une relation intentionnelle et positionnelle. Malgré cette distinction, en imposant ces conditions (incompatibilité et position) pour qu’il (...) soit question de normativité intentionnelle, Brentano et Husserl se trouvèrent tous deux à favoriser un réductionnisme normatif. Je proposerai pour ma part, dans un geste rappelant celui de la pragmatique d’Austin mais sans m’y restreindre pour autant, de dépasser ce réductionnisme normatif en cessant de limiter à ces conditions l’application de normes à nos intentionnalités. (shrink)

Dans ses écrits sur l’éthique, Brentano affirme que les propriétés morales — comme « bon » — sont l’objet d’une représentation intuitive non sensible dont le contenu est de nature « mentale ». Si la nature mentale de ces contenus en garantit le caractère d’évidence, elle en complexifie aussi l’élucidation ontologique et épistémologique, qui doit tenir compte de la classification brentanienne des actes psychiques. C’est justement cette complexité constitutive qui a fait de la théorie éthique de Brentano un passage obligé (...) pour beaucoup de courants philosophiques importants du xxe siècle, par exemple pour la phénoménologie des valeurs et l’intuitionnisme éthique. Le but de cette étude est de rappeler les aspects les plus significatifs de la théorie éthique de Brentano et de montrer si — et si oui, en quel sens — elle peut être qualifiée de « réaliste ». (shrink)

Riassunto: Il presente studio intende mostrare la natura specifica del cognitivismo emotivo proposto da Franz Brentano. In maniera più o meno evidente, la teoria del valore delineata da Brentano ha ricoperto un ruolo di primaria importanza nel dibattito assiologico-etico di fine Ottocento e inizio Novecento ed è ampiamente discussa anche all’interno del dibattito contemporaneo. Nel contributo vengono richiamati gli aspetti generali di tale teoria soffermandosi sulla nozione di “rappresentazione intuitiva” intesa come modalità che permette di conoscere ciò che giusto e (...) ciò che è ingiusto. Si passa dunque a discutere l’accezione brentaniana di “preferibilità intrinseca”, rilevando, in sede di conclusione, che l’effettiva centralità e attualità della teoria brentaniana sono conseguenza diretta della sua intrinseca natura “non univoca”. Parole chiave: Franz Brentano; Valore; Emozione; Cognitivismo emotivo; Presentazione intuitiva Franz Brentano and Emotional Cognitivism: This essay aims to describe the specific nature of the emotional cognitivism sketched out by Franz Brentano. Indeed in a more or less direct way the value-theory he developed has played a key-role both within the ethical-axiological debate at the turn of the 20th century and in contemporary debate. In this paper I describe the general traits of Brentano’s value-theory focusing primarily on his account of concrete intuitive presentation insofar as it allows us to acknowledge what it is right and wrong. Then I discuss Brentano’s characterization of “intrinsic preferability” and conclude by arguing that the historical-philosophical prominence and relevance of this value-account may be sought in its “not univocal nature”. Keywords: Franz Brentano; Value; Emotion; Emotional Cognitivism; Intuitive Presentation. (shrink)

Uriah Kriegel presents a rich exploration of the philosophy of the great nineteenth-century thinker Franz Brentano. He locates Brentano at the crossroads where the Anglo-American and continental European philosophical traditions diverged. At the centre of this account of Brentano's philosophy is the connection between mind and reality. Kriegel aims to develop Brentano's central ideas where they are overly programmatic or do not take into account philosophical developments that have taken place since Brentano's death a century ago; and to offer a (...) partial defense of Brentano's system as quite plausible and in any case extraordinarily creative and thought-provoking. Brentano's system grounds a complete metaphysics and value theory in a well-developed philosophy of mind, and accordingly the book is divided into three parts, devoted to Brentano's philosophy of mind, his metaphysics, and his moral philosophy. The book's fundamental ambition is to show how Brentano combines the clarity and precision of the analytic philosopher with the sweeping vision of the continental philosopher. Brentano pays careful attention to important distinctions, conscientiously defines key notions, presents precise arguments for his claims, judiciously considers potential objections, and in general proceeds very methodically - yet he does so not as an end in itself, but as a means only. His end is the crafting of a grand philosophical system in the classical sense, attempting to produce nothing less than a unified theory of the true, the good, and the beautiful. (shrink)

Der Autor sucht in diesem Buch eine endgültige Antwort auf die bislang als offen geltende metaethische Frage nach der Begründbarkeit normativer Ethik zu geben. Im Zentrum steht die Absicht, die These der Begründbarkeit der Ethik als selbstkontradiktorisch und damit unmöglich zutreffend auszuweisen. Aus methodologischen Gründen findet dabei der phänomenalistische Ethikbegründungsversuch Franz Brentanos besondere Berücksichtigung. Verbunden mit dem Problem der Ethikbegründung widmet sich der Autor ebenfalls dem Problem der Willensfreiheit.

The Swiss philosopher Anton Marty (Schwyz, 1847 - Prague, 1914) belongs, with Carl Stumpf, to the first circle of Brentano’s pupils. Within Brentano’s school (and, to some extent, in the secondary literature), Marty has often been considered (in particular by Meinong) a kind of would-be epigone of his master (Fisette & Fréchette 2007: 61-2). There is no doubt that Brentano’s doctrine often provides Marty with his philosophical starting points. But Marty often arrives at original conclusions which are diametrically opposed to (...) Brentano’s views. This is true of his views about space and time and about judgment, emotions and intentionality. In the latter case, for example, Marty develops Brentano’s view and its implications in great detail (Mulligan 1989; Rollinger 2004), but uses them to formulate a very unBrentanian account of intentionality as a relation of ideal assimilation (Chrudzimski 1999; Cesalli & Taieb 2013). Marty’s philosophy of language, on the other hand, is one of the first philosophies worthy of the name. In what follows, we contrast briefly their accounts of (i) judgment and states of affairs and of (ii) emotings and value (two topics of foremost significance, for Brentano and Marty’s theoretical and practical philosophies respectively) (§1), and their philosophies of language (§2). Brentano’s view of language is based on his philosophy of mind. Marty takes over the latter and turns a couple of claims by Brentano about language into a sophisticated philosophy of language of a kind made familiar much later by Grice. Marty’s philosophy of states of affairs and value and of the mind’s relations to these also takes off from views sketched by the early Brentano, views forcefully rejected by the later Brentano. (shrink)

In his entire oeuvre Brentano defended a scientific conception of philosophy and advocated the adoption of a rigorous, scientific method. Given this background it might come as a surprise that in his reflections on aesthetics he firmly rejected the classic definition of aesthetics as the science of beauty. This must not be read as an expression of disinterest in – or a dismissal of – aesthetics, though. It is rather an expression of Brentano's view concerning the position of aesthetics in (...) his overall system. He conceived it – on a par with logic and ethics – not as a theoretical science, but as a practical discipline that was rooted in psychology: aesthetics, Brentano suggests, is not constituted by a set of intrinsically related propositions; it rather serves the practical purpose of instructing those who want to experience the beautiful with correct taste or to create works of art. The task of aesthetics is, in other words, to formulate a set of rules or instructions that teach us how to correctly experience beauty, how to come to prefer the more over the less beautiful, but also how to create beauty and how to produce works of art that have the power to bring about aesthetic pleasure in the beholder. (shrink)

This paper explores Franz Brentano’s metaethics by comparing it to Thomas Reid’s. Brentano and Reid share a commitment to moral realism and they are both aptly classified as intuitionists concerning moral knowledge and the nature of moral judgment. However, their respective versions of intuitionism are importantly different, in ways that reflect more general differences between their respective epistemological views. Sections III and IV of the paper focus more exclusively on Brentano’s metaethics and some of its unorthodox features. These features tie (...) in with notorious difficulties for moral realism concerning the nature of moral truth and the relation between moral judgment and motivation to act. (shrink)

Both through his own work and that of his students, Franz Clemens Brentano had an often underappreciated influence on the course of 20 th - and 21 st -century philosophy. _The Routledge Handbook of Franz Brentano and the Brentano School_ offers full coverage of Brentano’s philosophy and his influence. It contains 38 brand-new essays from an international team of experts that offer a comprehensive view of Brentano’s central research areas—philosophy of mind, metaphysics, and value theory—as well as of the principal (...) figures shaped by Brentano’s school of thought. A General Introduction serves as an overview of Brentano and the contents of the volume and three separate bibliographies point students and researchers on to further avenues of inquiry. Systematic and detailed, _The Routledge Handbook of Franz Brentano and the Brentano School_ provides readers with a valuable reference to Brentano’s work, and to his lasting importance in the history of philosophy and in contemporary debates. (shrink)

Franz Brentano was not a systematic writer, but he was very much a systematic thinker. Through his manuscripts, lecture notes, letters, dictations, and occasional published writings, one can discern a systematic, unified approach to the true, the good, and the beautiful. My goal here is to articulate explicitly this approach, and the philosophical program it reflects. The exercise requires going over big stretches of terrain with some efficiency; I will go just as deep into Brentano’s approaches to the true, the (...) good, and the beautiful as is required to make explicit their structural unity. (shrink)

Franz Brentano’s theory of emotion is tightly bound up with many of his other central claims, in such a way that one has to work out how it relates to these other claims if one is to understand its distinctive character. There are two main axes of investigation. The first results from the fact that Brentano introduces his theory of emotion as part of his overall theory of mind, which consists of a number of closely interconnected theses concerning the nature (...) of mental phenomena, the nature of consciousness, and the classification of mental phenomena into fundamental kinds (Brentano 1874/1973a). The second derives from the fact that his theory of emotion also forms the foundation of his epistemology of objective value, which he elaborates in a framework constituted by an epistemic theory of truth and an extended analogy he draws between emotions and judgments (Brentano 1889/1969). I will consider both of these axes in what follows. (shrink)

This chapter explains Franz Brentano's metaethical theory and how it purports to deal with such difficulties. Brentano explains correctness in emotions by analogy with correctness in judgements. For a judgement to be correct is for it to concord with a judgement made by someone who judges with self-evidence (Evidenz). Self-evident judgements are guaranteed to be correct, and they are based either on "inner perception" or on presentations of objects that are rejected apodictically. Brentano's metaethical theory concerns first and foremost the (...) psychology of valuing and of moral judgement. Brentano is clearly a cognitivist about evaluative and moral judgement; such judgements are judgements about the correctness of feelings, and judgements are cognitive acts. However, one aspect of his position that seems congenial to contemporary expressivism. This has to do with expressivist treatments of disagreement. Brentano's views seem akin to the kind of foundationalist intuitionism that is traditionally associated with non-naturalism. (shrink)

L’article revient, à la lumière de Brentano, sur l’«esthétique» d’Aristote. Si Aristote a insisté sur la manière dont la perception suppose la donation d’un perceptible existant à l’extérieur, il semble qu’il est aussi fait droit à ce qu’aurait de spécifique le percept, en tant qu’il constituerait un objet perçu interne à l’âme. Il faut dès lors revenir sur la passivité que constituerait la sensation, et insister sur l’activité perceptive de l’âme en tant qu’elle vise, déjà dans la sensation, un objet (...) mental. Une telle lecture «brentanienne» d’Aristote se trouve déjà annoncée par l’interprétation de la doctrine de la connaissance aristotélicienne que l’on trouve chez les commentateurs grecs, Thémistius et Philopon notamment. (shrink)

Trata-se de mostrar como as noções de correção e incorreção dos sentimentos têm papel fundamental no modo como adquirimos o conceito de bom segundo a filosofia moral de Brentano. Com vistas a elucidar o sentimento como uma atitude emotiva que se modaliza na forma de amor ou ódio para com o objeto intencional, apresenta-se a classificação brentaniana dos fenômenos psíquicos em representação, juízo e sentimento. Mediante a tese da analogia entre juízo e sentimento, busca-se esclarecer que algo poderá ser considerado (...) “bom” somente quando o ato emotivo envolvido for correto, assim como “verdadeiro” pode ser dito a respeito daquilo que é afirmado apenas se o ato judicativo for correto. Isto, por sua vez, exige também considerar a origem do conceito de correção da esfera dos afetos. (shrink)

En este artículo se analiza la teoría de las emociones de Brentano, según la cual éstas son actos intencionales basados en juicios y tienen un papel central en el reconocimiento del valor y en la motivación para la acción. Tras una exposición del panorama intelectual de las teorías de las emociones a finales del siglo XIX, sigue el análisis de la teoría de Brentano y de su proyecto ético, para terminar remarcando la influencia de su legado en los autores de (...) la escuela fenomenológica y la filosofía analítica. (shrink)

Although interpreters have long recognized Franz Brentano’s powerful impact on his students, the career-long persistence of his hold on Edmund Husserl is still underestimated. Conventional narratives of Husserl’s development describe his mentor’s pervasive early impact followed by a sharp break from the master’s philosophy. My essay challenges this account by arguing that Husserl’s shift toward transcendental phenomenology within the domain of ethics marked a reappraisal – even a reinvigoration – of Brentanian premises, rather than an attempt to discard them.

Introduction Nous aborderons ici le problème de l?intentionnalité des sentiments et du statut de leurs corrélats, les valeurs. La thèse « standard » en la matière, que l?on trouve aussi bien chez Brentano que chez Husserl, avec néanmoins des nuances significatives sur lesquelles nous aurons à revenir, veut que ces actes de l?affectivité s?édifient sur la base des représentations, considérées comme les conditions de l?apparaître en général. Pour Brentano, tout acte psychique est ou suppose une représentation comme rapport à un (...) objet distinguant les phénomènes psychiques des phénomènes physiques. Les phénomènes psy­chiques se distribuent, on le sait, en représentations, jugements et émotions, et la représentation sert de présupposition et de motivation aux deux autres types d?actes. Les actes de représentation sont indépendants, alors que les actes de jugement et d?émotion (amour et haine) en sont dépendants. Ce n?est que sur la base d?une présentation initiale d?un quelque chose, qu?un juge­ment ou une appréciation peuvent advenir. Le jugement et l?appréciation portent par conséquent sur les « choses » présentées dans l?acte de la repré­sentation, qui donne accès à un contenu en général. Il semble que Husserl conserve un schéma similaire, du moins en ce qui concerne les actes affec­tifs, car l?on sait qu?il récuse la thèse générale de la présupposition de la représentation en ce qui. (shrink)

This article aims to evaluate the Franz Brentano’s ethics’s influence on the Max Scheler’s axiology. That influence is ambivalent, i.e., Scheler accepts some thesis and rejects others. The article’s idea is, on the one hand, that the Brentano’s positive influence is decisive for Scheler. On the other hand, the disagreement between both of them is partly real and partly rather apparent. And this apparent disagreement discovers precisely two points which deserves more reflection: the nature of axiological perception and the nature (...) and function of love. (shrink)

At least since Hume we have a serious problem with explaining our moral valuations. Most of us – with notable exception of certain (in)famous esoteric thinkers like Nietzsche or De Sade – share a common intuition that our moral claims are in an important sense objective. We believe that they can be right or wrong; and we believe that if they happen to be right, then they are binding for each human being conducting a similar action in similar circumstances. Now (...) Hume drew our attention to the fact that our valuations do not follow from descriptions of the actions in question. There seems to be nothing in the “descriptive content” of the world around us that could make them true or false and in face of that it becomes very puzzling how they ever could be right, objective or committing. As we all know Hume’s solution proclaims emotions as the basis of our moral valuations. Calling something right or wrong should be in the first place understood as an expression of our emotional attitude toward it. This move explains a part of the initial puzzle, but it also leaves us with a certain unpleasant consequence. It seems that in the strict sense emotions could be neither rational nor true, and consequently we can hardly imagine any conclusive moral argument. De gustibus non disputandum est. Our feeling of objectivity vis a vis our moral valuations has to be classified as a kind of illusion and what follows is a kind of moral relativism or scepticism. Some philosophers are happy with this conclusion, but some others find it untenable. Brentano and his followers belonged to the second group. They generally accepted Hume’s claim that emotions constitute the basis of our moral valuations but developed interesting strategies to avoid his relativistic conclusions. (shrink)

Study of the controversy between Franz Brentano and his student Carl Stumpf on emotions and sense-feelings. The issue is whether the pleasure that provides an object such as a work of art is intentional, as it is the case in Brentano's theory in which it is closely related to the class of emotions (love and hate), or merely phenomenal as Stumpf wants it. The paper is divided into two parts : I first examine several aspects of the relationship between Stumpf (...) and Brentano and I evaluate in the second part whether Stumpf's deviations from several theses of Brentano's descriptive psychology, namely on emotions and sense-feelings, challenge his commitment to Brentano's program in philosophy. (shrink)

The so-called Wrong Kind of Reason (WKR) problem for Scanlon's account of value has been much discussed recently. In a recent issue of Utilitas Gerald Lang provides a highly useful critique of extant proposed solutions to the WKR problem and suggests a novel solution of his own. In this note I offer a critique of Lang's solution and respond to some criticisms Lang directs at a Brentano-style approach suggested by Sven Danielsson and me.

According to ‘Fitting Attitude’ (FA) analyses of value, for an object to be valuable is for that object to have properties—other than its being valuable—that make it a fitting object of certain responses. In short, if an object is positively valuable it is fitting to favour it; if an object is negatively valuable it is fitting to disfavour it. There are several variants of FA analyses. Some hold that for an object to be valuable is for it to be such (...) that it ought to be favoured; others hold that value is analyzable in terms of reasons or requirements to favour. All these variants of the FA analysis are subject to a partiality challenge : there are circumstances in which some agents have reasons to favour or disfavour some object—due to the personal relations in which they stand to the object—without this having any bearing on the value of the object. A. C. Ewing was one of the first philosophers to draw attention to the partiality challenge for FA analyses. In this paper I explain the challenge and consider Ewing's responses, one of which is preferable to the other, but none of which is entirely satisfactory. I go on to develop an alternative Brentano-inspired response that Ewing could have offered and that may well be preferable to the responses Ewing actually did offer. (shrink)

The topic of this paper is the relationship between value facts (e.g., that this is good) and value experiences (e.g., appreciation). Its aim is, first, to give a concise account of the value theories of some important early phenomenologists (Franz Brentano, Christian von Ehrenfels, Alexius Meinong), second, to show that they raise questions and put forward arguments that are still worthy of note, and, third, to critically assess these arguments. Among others, the following questions are discussed: Can past and other (...) nonexistent objects have value? Are value experiences feelings or rather desires? Are value properties exemplified by “immanent objects” only? (shrink)

[Modernism and Brentano’s conception of ethics].

Les pages qui suivent sont consacrées à un certain problème qui est au fondement de l’éthique de Franz Brentano. Je tâcherai de clarifier et de problématiser l’idée brentanienne d’une analogie entre logique et éthique, entre correction logique et justice éthique, entre l’existant et le bien. Après en avoir dégager la signification générale, j’en indiquerai les conséquences les plus importantes sur l’éthique brentanienne dans son ensemble. Une première conséquence, que je commenterai en détail, est l’« objectivisme » éthique de Brentano, dont (...) je montrerai qu’il n’est pas forcément synonyme de réalisme. Ensuite, j’expliquerai en quels termes Brentano s’efforce de transposer analogiquement à l’éthique sa théorie de la vérité-correspondance, y compris sa reformulation en termes d’évidence. Enfin, je donnerai quelques brèves indications sur l’influence marquée qu’a eue l’éthique brentanienne sur Husserl, en me limitant à la question de l’analogie logico-éthique. (shrink)

According to T. M. Scanlon's 'buck-passing' analysis of value, x is good means that x has properties that provide reasons to take up positive attitudes vis-à-vis x. Some authors have claimed that this idea can be traced back to Franz Brentano, who said in 1889 that the judgement that x is good is the judgement that a positive attitude to x is correct ('richtig'). The most discussed problem in the recent literature on buckpassing is known as the 'wrong kind of (...) reason' problem (the WKR problem): it seems quite possible that there is sometimes reason to favour an object although that object is not good and possibly very evil. The problem is to delineate exactly what distinguishes reasons of the right kind from reasons of the wrong kind. In this paper we offer a Brentano-style solution. We also note that one version of the WKR problem was put forward by G. E. Moore in his review of the English translation of Brentano's Vom Ursprung sittlicher Erkenntnis. Before getting to how our Brentano-style approach might offer a way out for Brentano and the buck-passers, we briefly consider and reject an interesting attempt to solve the WKR problem recently proposed by John Skorupski. (shrink)

In this article (1) I extract from Brentano’s works (three) formal arguments against “genealogical explanations” of ethical claims. Such explanation can also be designated as “naturalism” (not his appellation); (2) I counter these arguments, by showing how genealogical explanations of even apodictic moral claims are logically possible (albeit only if certain unlikely, stringent conditions are met); (3) I show how Nietzsche’s ethics meets these stringent conditions, but evolutionary ethics does not. My more general thesis is that naturalism and intuitionism in (...) ethics need not be mutually incompatible. (shrink)

In this article (1) I extract from Brentano’s works (three) formal arguments against “genealogical explanations” of ethical claims. Such explanation can also be designated as “naturalism” (not his appellation); (2) I counter these arguments, by showing how genealogical explanations of even apodictic moral claims are logically possible (albeit only if certain unlikely, stringent conditions are met); (3) I show how Nietzsche’s ethics meets these stringent conditions, but evolutionary ethics does not. My more general thesis is that naturalism and intuitionism in (...) ethics need not be mutually incompatible. (shrink)