THE MORAL PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS AS REFLECTED ON DAN BROWN’S INFERNO
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26618/exposure.v9i1.2892Kata Kunci:
Inferno, moral-philosophical, philosophy of mind, intentionality theoryAbstrak
Moral philosophical is central to philosophy study as most issues have been discussed in the philosophy that related to morality. People who are not familiar with the other philosophical belief would think that the other party's belief is wrong while they hold the truth. This issue can be found in any social problem and has been reflected in one of literature work. A literature product is the closest portrait which reflects society's real situation and cultural background, including moral and ethnicity; one example of the products is Dan Brown’s Inferno. In the novel, Brown portrays that there are two sides to the philosophical belief of the truth, which exist in a society. Two main characters reflect the two different beliefs of truths; Bertrand Zobrist versus Dr. Langdon and society. This article uses intentionality theory, which is proposed by Husserl to do moral philosophical analysis critically in order to examine how two sides of philosophical views are believed by two types of parties, society, and Zobrist. To support the analysis, the writer uses philosophy of mind as the primary theory to analyze the moral perspective. The result shows that Zobrist has his own belief that killing half of the human population by bombing them is the right thing to do to save the world. His belief has been built as he is conveyed by Inferno, one of Dante’s great work. Meanwhile, Dr. Langdon and society think that Zobrist’s belief is wrong; his action and plan to kill people is inhumanReferensi
Baressi, J. (2007). Consciousness and Intentionality. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 14(1), 77-93.
Bell, F. (2011). Connectivism: Its Place in Theory-informed Research and Innovation in Technology-enabled Learning. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distance Learning, 12(3), 98-118.
Bentham, J. (2000). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Batoche Books.
Bermudez, J. L. (2006). Philosophy of Psychology. New York: Routledge.
Chowdhury, M. (2016). Emphasizing Morals, Values, Ethics, and Character Education in Science Education and Science Teaching. The Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Science, 4(2), 1-16.
Cole, T. (2014). Reconsidering the Role of Intentionality in Deceptive Communication: A Commentary on IMT2 and TDT from a Relational Science Point of View. Journal of Language Social Psychological, 33(4), 393-397.
Dewalque, A. (2013). Brentano and the Parts of the Mental: A Mereological Approach to Phenomenal Intentionality. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 12(3), 447-464. DOI: 10.1007/s11097-012-9293-8
Ellemers, N., Van der Toorn, J., Paunov, Y., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2019). The Psychology of Morality: A Review and Analysis of Empirical Studies Published from 1940 through 2017. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1-35.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868318811759
Guarnieri, P. (2019). Interactive Intentionality and Norm Formation. Journal of Institutional Econ., 15(4), 579-593. DOI: 10.1017/S1744137418000486
Hansson, S. O., & Unit, P. (2003). Ten Philosophical Problems in Belief Revision. Journal of Logic and Computation, 13(1), 37-49. DOI: 10.1093/logcom/13.1.37
Jacquette, D. (2016). Art, Expression, Perception, and Intentionality. Journal of Aesthetics and Phenomenology, 1(1), 63-90. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.2752/20539339XX14005942183973
Kriegel, U. (2003). Is Intentionality Dependent Upon Consciousness? Philosophical Studies, 1(2), 1-21. DOI: 10.1023/B:PHIL.0000007204.53683.d7
Malle, B. F., & Knobe, J. (1997). The Folk Concept of Intentionality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(2), 101-121. doi:https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1996.1314
Mazijk, C. V. (2017). Some Reflections on Husserlian Intentionality, Intentionalism, and Non-Propositional Contents. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 47(4), 499-517. DOI: 10.1080/00455091.20161255500
Mclntyre, R. (1982). Husserl's Phenomenological Conception of Intentionality and Its Difficulties. Journal of Philosophia, 223-248. DOI:0.1007/BF02380839
Mohamed Roslan, S. M., Rashid, R. A., Yunus, K., & Latif Azmi, M. N. (2016). Fantasy Versus Reality in Literature. SSRN Electronic Journal, 212-223. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2872977
Pellizzoni, S., Girotto, V., & Surian, L. (2010). Beliefs and Moral Valence Affect Intentionality Attributions: The Case of Side Effects. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 1(2), 201-109. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-009-0008-1
Rowlands, M. (2015). Hard Problems of Intentionality. Journal of Philosophia, 43(3), 741-746. DOI:10.1007/s11406-015-9626-2
Van Duppen, Z. (2018). Review of Real Hallucinations: Psychiatric Illness, Intentionality, and the Interpersonal World by Matthew Ratcliffe. Journal of Phenomenology Cognition Science, 17(3), 605-609. DOI:DOI 10.1007/s11097-018-9572-0
Varga, S. (2015). Intentionality, Normativity, and Naturalism. Journal of Philosophia, 43(3), 611-624. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-015-9629-z
Unduhan
Diterbitkan
Terbitan
Bagian
Lisensi
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
In order to assure the highest standards for published articles, a peer review policy is applied. In pursue of the compliance with academic standards, all parties involved in the publishing process (the authors, the editors and the editorial board and the reviewers) agree to meet the responsibilities stated below in accordance to the Journal publication ethics and malpractice statement.
Duties of Authors:
- The author(s) warrant that the submitted article is an original work, which has not been previously published, and that they have obtained an agreement from any co-author(s) prior to the manuscript’s submission;
- The author(s) should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal;
- The authors(s) make certain that the manuscript meets the terms of the Manuscript Submission Guideline regarding appropriate academic citation and that no copyright infringement occurs;
- The authors(s) should inform the editors about any conflict of interests and report any errors they subsequently, discover in their manuscript.
Duties of Editors and the Editorial Board:
- The editors, together with the editorial board, are responsible for deciding upon the publication or rejection of the submitted manuscripts based only on their originality, significance, and relevance to the domains of the journal;
- The editors evaluate the manuscripts compliance with academic criteria, the domains of the journal and the guidelines;
- The editors must at all times respect the confidentiality of any information pertaining to the submitted manuscripts;
- The editors assign the review of each manuscript to two reviewers chosen according to their domains of expertise. The editors must take into account any conflict of interest reported by the authors and the reviewers.
- The editors must ensure that the comments and recommendations of the reviewers are sent to the author(s) in due time and that the manuscripts are returned to the editors, who take the final decision to publish them or not.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
