{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"6254e091-fea7-4580-ad1e-08ddba85762d","title":"理性的权威","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787532763450","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"6254e091-fea7-4580-ad1e-08ddba85762d","id":"6254e091-fea7-4580-ad1e-08ddba85762d","uuid":"6254e091-fea7-4580-ad1e-08ddba85762d","title":"理性的权威","normalized_title":"理性的权威","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787532763450","isbns":["9787532763450"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":171,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/6254e091-fea7-4580-ad1e-08ddba85762d","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E7%90%86%E6%80%A7%E7%9A%84%E6%9D%83%E5%A8%81","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/6254e091-fea7-4580-ad1e-08ddba85762d/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/6254e091-fea7-4580-ad1e-08ddba85762d/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/6254e091-fea7-4580-ad1e-08ddba85762d","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/6254e091-fea7-4580-ad1e-08ddba85762d/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/6254e091-fea7-4580-ad1e-08ddba85762d/search"},"page":{"printed_page":52,"pdf_page":60,"physical_index":60,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"9d9feb9a34778a67fd13b5ff51f9591b1a6d8177de9a4392cc8b4aa547a6e76a"},"chapter":"The Last Word理性的权威","content":"关键的问题并不仅仅在于物理的或心理学的状态的有限性与意义的无限意涵之间的不一致性，而且也像克里普克所指出的那样，在于非规范性与规范性之间的间距。①意义暗示了在正确与错误的答案或应用之间的不同。行为主义的、倾向性的或经验性的事实并不具有这样的意涵。从而前者就不可能存在于后者之中。这正是休谟关于“是”与“应当”之间间距的一个直接例子。②\n\n关于规范的自然主义说明在伦理学中也是不可能的，对此我们将在之后作出适当的讨论。在此则仅限于主张这样一点：维特根斯坦的悖论已经清楚地揭示了以下做法的错误性，即是认为一个人用一个词语去意指某个东西可以被看成关于他的一个自然的事实，并且这一事实可用非规范性、非意向性的词项去作出分析。“意指并不是一个伴随有某个词的过程，因为没有一个过程可以具有意指的结论。”③我确实用“加”去意指加法；这在一个十分确定的意义上是关于我的一个事实。但在回应“什么事实？”这一问题时，除去为某个可能不很熟悉“加法”的人进一步去指明它的定义以外，任何解答的企图都是一个错误。试图逃离规范与意向的习语而遁入另一在不同的、还原的意义上是“事实性的”的空间是错误的。\n\n052\n\n理性的权威\n\n① Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language, pp. 22– 23.\n\n② A Treatise of Human Nature, book 3, part 1, sec. 1.\n\n③ Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, p. 218.","previous_page":51,"next_page":53}