What Does the Frame Problem Tell us About Moral Normativity?

被引:0
作者
Terry Horgan
Mark Timmons
机构
[1] University of Arizona,
来源
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice | 2009年 / 12卷
关键词
Frame problem; Relevance problem; Computational cognitive science; Particularism; Generalism; Moral normativity;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Within cognitive science, mental processing is often construed as computation over mental representations—i.e., as the manipulation and transformation of mental representations in accordance with rules of the kind expressible in the form of a computer program. This foundational approach has encountered a long-standing, persistently recalcitrant, problem often called the frame problem; it is sometimes called the relevance problem. In this paper we describe the frame problem and certain of its apparent morals concerning human cognition, and we argue that these morals have significant import regarding both the nature of moral normativity and the human capacity for mastering moral normativity. The morals of the frame problem bode well, we argue, for the claim that moral normativity is not fully systematizable by exceptionless general principles, and for the correlative claim that such systematizability is not required in order for humans to master moral normativity.
引用
收藏
页码:25 / 51
页数:26
相关论文
共 15 条
  • [1] Dancy J(1982)Ethical Particularism and Morally Relevant Properties Mind 92 530-547
  • [2] Guarini M(2006)Particularism and the Classification and Reclassification of Moral Cases IEEE Intell Syst Mag 24 22-28
  • [3] Haidt J(2001)‘The Emotional Dog and Its Rational Tail: A Social Intuitionist Approach to Moral Judgment’ Psychol Rev 108 814-834
  • [4] Horgan T(1997)Connectionism and the Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science Metaphilosophy 28 1-30
  • [5] Horgan T(1997)Modelling the Non-computational Mind: Reply to Litch Philos Psychol 10 365-371
  • [6] Horgan T(1990)Soft Laws Midwest Stud Philos 15 256-279
  • [7] Tienson J(1994)A Nonclassical Framework for Cognitive Science Synthese 101 304-345
  • [8] Horgan T(2007)Morphological Rationalism and the Psychology of Moral Judgment Ethical Theory Pract 10 279-295
  • [9] Tienson J(2007)‘Reasons as Defaults’, Imprint 7 1-28
  • [10] Horgan T(1972)Subjective Probability: A Judgment of Representativeness Cognit Psychol 3 430-454