BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Grails iCalendar plugin//NONSGML Grails iCalendar plugin//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20260918T101315Z
DTSTART;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20230831T150000
DTEND;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20230831T170000
SUMMARY:Virtue\, Moral knowledge and ‘Connaturality’ - An illuminating notion or an obscure and confused idea
UID:20260918T101315Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:20f6:41ff:fe59:be4a%3
TZID:Australia/Melbourne
LOCATION:250 Victoria Parade\, East Melbourne\, Australia\, 3002
DESCRIPTION:<p>Famously in &lsquo\;Modern Moral Philosophy&rsquo\; Anscombe proposed an alternative to familiar consequentialist and deontological theories suggesting that we would do better to return to an ethics of virtue. In MMP\, however\, she did not obviously engage issues to do with the ontology and epistemology of ethics. But there are hints in other pieces of a distinctive kind of knowledge of good and bad which she sometimes speaks of as &lsquo\;mystical&rsquo\;. In posthumously published writings this matter becomes more apparent where she discusses &lsquo\;knowledge by connaturality&rsquo\;. She refers in this connection to Aquinas. He draws a distinction between two kinds of knowledge: that got through theoretical\, discursive\, inferential reasoning (&lsquo\;per modum cognitionis&rsquo\; or &lsquo\;per rationis inquisitionem&rsquo\;) and that acquired through experiential awareness (per notitia experimentalis). What she says is somewhat obscure (and confused) but the issue connects interestingly with John McDowell&rsquo\;s discussion of virtue-knowledge (eg in &lsquo\;Virtue and Reason&rsquo\;). I will explain and discuss these matters raising the question are what they (Anscombe\, Aquinas and McDowell) offer illuminating notions or obscure and confused ideas?</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Kyle H. Blumberg:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR