Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. In What Sense Wrong Conceptions of Eudaimonia Get at Least Some Things Right.Fernando Martins Mendonça - 2024 - Dissertatio 58:272-301.
  • El panóptico de Bentham y la instrumentalización de los derechos humanos.Pablo Beytía Reyes - 2017 - Universitas Philosophica 34 (68):173-196.
    Este artículo revisa los fundamentos del utilitarismo de Jeremy Bentham y las principales críticas a esta doctrina, profundizando en aquella que sostiene su incompatibilidad con el respeto irrestricto de los derechos humanos. Insertándose en esta problemática, analiza una paradigmática propuesta política del filósofo inglés: el panóptico, proyecto arquitectónico formulado por Bentham a finales del siglo XVIII con el fin de reformar el sistema penitenciario europeo. A partir del análisis del Panóptico –que se descubre como una aplicación coherente del utilitarismo benthamiano–, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Synthesising Corporate Responsibility on Organisational and Societal Levels of Analysis: An Integrative Perspective.Pasi Heikkurinen & Jukka Mäkinen - 2018 - Journal of Business Ethics 149 (3):589-607.
    This article develops an integrative perspective on corporate responsibility by synthesising competing perspectives on the responsibility of the corporation at the organisational and societal levels of analysis. We review three major corporate responsibility perspectives, which we refer to as economic, critical, and politico-ethical. We analyse the major potential uses and pitfalls of the perspectives, and integrate the debate on these two levels. Our synthesis concludes that when a society has a robust division of moral labour in place, the responsibility of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Conceptual re-engineering: from explication to reflective equilibrium.Georg Brun - 2020 - Synthese 197 (3):925-954.
    Carnap and Goodman developed methods of conceptual re-engineering known respectively as explication and reflective equilibrium. These methods aim at advancing theories by developing concepts that are simultaneously guided by pre-existing concepts and intended to replace these concepts. This paper shows that Carnap’s and Goodman’s methods are historically closely related, analyses their structural interconnections, and argues that there is great systematic potential in interpreting them as aspects of one method, which ultimately must be conceived as a component of theory development. The (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   31 citations