When Sharp Distinctions Fail to Be Useful

Constructivist Foundations 9 (2):273-274 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Open peer commentary on the article “Ethics: A Radical-constructivist Approach” by Andreas Quale. Upshot: The sharp distinction between cognitive and non-cognitive knowledge provided by Andreas Quale prevents the author from finding well-founded reasons for constructivist ethics

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,612

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Radical Constructivism Is Neutral.H. Gash - 2014 - Constructivist Foundations 9 (2):271-273.
Why I Am a Constructivist Atheist.J. P. Van Bendegem - 2015 - Constructivist Foundations 11 (1):138-140.
Issues in Relation to Learning About Religion.H. Gash - 2015 - Constructivist Foundations 11 (1):137-138.
Cognition Made Neat and Tidy.M. Larochelle - 2014 - Constructivist Foundations 9 (2):269-271.
Ethics: A Sociological View.P. Lewin - 2014 - Constructivist Foundations 9 (2):265-266.
Some Questions about Responsibility.J. Lochhead - 2014 - Constructivist Foundations 9 (2):275-276.
Can a Radical Constructivist Be Religious? - Yes!L. P. Steffe - 2015 - Constructivist Foundations 11 (1):131-134.
Constructivists Should Drop the Claim of Ethical Responsibility.M. Danelzik - 2014 - Constructivist Foundations 9 (2):274-275.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-03-15

Downloads
7 (#603,698)

6 months
7 (#1,397,300)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references