A Suggested Context for Axiology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.67945/jfa.v1i.27Keywords:
formal axiology, fact-value distinction, Hilary Putnam, axiological experienceAbstract
Just as reflection on ethics is grounded in moral experience, axiological reflection has an experiential ground in both appreciation of value and negative value experiences, such as loss or pain. This primordial experience of value can be termed “axiological shock.” Secondly, any dichotomy or divorce of fact and value must be rejected. The work of Hilary Putnam describes the confused effort to divorce fact and value. It is possible to reason about values because values are grounded in the factual world and facts are value-laden. Epistemic, aesthetic, and moral values permeate our language, which is often both descriptive and evaluative. Finally, the intellectual context of axiological reflection is explored. Adjacent disciplines such as metaphysics, theology, sociology, or psychology are important for a holistic view of value. However, the integrity of axiology must be maintained, without reducing it to an aspect of some other discipline.References
Edwards, Rem B. (2008). “Know Thyself, Know Thy Psychology.” Journal of Formal Axiology: Theory and Practice. 1, 81-100.
Edwards, Rem B. (2001). What Caused the Big Bang? New York - Amsterdam: Editions Rodopi.
Hartmann, Nicolai (2002). Moral Phenomena, Ethics, Vol 1. New York: Transaction Publishers.
Jasper, Karl (1953). The Origin and Goal of History. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Maslow, Abraham (1968). Toward a Psychology of Being. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Munitz, Milton K. (1965). The Mystery of Existence. New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts.
Putnam, Hilary (2002). The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Tillich, Paul (1951). Systematic Theology, Vol. I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Tillich, Paul (1952). The Courage to Be. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form without prior written permission from the Robert S. Hartman Institute, except as permitted by law.
