Em intervalos frequentes ao longo dos anos, o professor Chomsky vituperou tanto contra noções do senso comum quanto contra noções técnicas de linguagem pública ou “linguagem externalizada”, afirmando que elas são confusas, mal definidas ou desprovidas de qualquer interesse científico. Como cientista, ele somente estaria interessado na linguagem pública se ela fosse um “objeto real do mundo real” (Chomsky, 1993, p. 39), e não uma noção “artificial” e “arbitrária” (Chomsky, 1985, p. 26). Proponho articular tal noção de linguagem pública para (...) ele. Chomsky também condena a noção que de o propósito da linguagem é a comunicação. Sustentarei, ao contrário, que uma função primária da faculdade humana da linguagem é apoiar convenções linguísticas, e que estas têm uma função essencialmente comunicativa. (shrink)

The understanding of value in moral naturalism as a descriptivist endeavor will be analized through an application of the naturalistic fallacy on an evolutive perspective of moral psychology. From a brief analysis of the naturalistic fallacy as proposed by Dall’Agnol, I’ll criticize the author’s application of such on what he refers to as moral naturalism. Contrasting E. Wilson’s sociobiology with R. Triver’s theory of reciprocal altruism I will procure a definition of naturalized ethics by investigating the psychological roots of moral (...) motivation. Once identified the descriptive and non-reductionist aspects of contemporary moral naturalism, the naturalistic fallacy presents itself as unbecoming of its hallmark and metaethical importance, and it becomes clear that a naturalized comprehension of human moral behavior is vital to the understanding of the motivations for action and the conception of value; though weak under a normative perspective. (shrink)

I’ll attempt to describe contemporary moral naturalism by an analysis of cognitivist and non-cognitivist theories, elucidating a normative dichotomy in current ethics. Although a recent model in the history of philosophy, post-humean moral naturalism has a myriad of different theories under its name. I’ll attempt to delineate a standard definition of the naturalistic perspective of morality to then divide cognitivist and non-cognitivist theories in order to better understand key points of their difference. This will uncover a normative dichotomy between theories (...) of action, purely descriptive, and of value, which focuses on prescriptiveness. (shrink)