The aim of this paper is to reply to Amoretti and Iannucci’s though-provoking comments. Discussing with them will enable me to clarify some of the ideas presented in the book as well as to add further elements to the debate. In § 2, I will deal with the complicate relationship between normative and empirical research (replying to Amoretti), and, in § 3, I will consider the extent to which the dual-process model that has gained currency in moral psychology should be revised or abandoned (replying to Iannucci).
Sciences and ethics. Replies to comments / Songhorian, S.. - In: NOTIZIE DI POLITEIA. - ISSN 1128-2401. - 37:144(2021), pp. 169-172.
Sciences and ethics. Replies to comments
Songhorian S.
2021-01-01
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to reply to Amoretti and Iannucci’s though-provoking comments. Discussing with them will enable me to clarify some of the ideas presented in the book as well as to add further elements to the debate. In § 2, I will deal with the complicate relationship between normative and empirical research (replying to Amoretti), and, in § 3, I will consider the extent to which the dual-process model that has gained currency in moral psychology should be revised or abandoned (replying to Iannucci).| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Politeia_144_Songhorian.pdf
solo gestori archivio
Tipologia:
PDF editoriale (versione pubblicata dall'editore)
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati
Dimensione
200.01 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
200.01 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
