Text vykládá jednotlivé pojmy, které v Aristotelově díle představují kandidáty na protějšek moderního pojmu zdravého rozumu, a uvádí je do vzájemné souvislosti. Především v logických a rétorických textech Aristotelés pracuje s termínem endoxos, který používá pro výroky a osoby, které jsou v daném společenství uznávány. V epistemologii pracuje s termínem koiné aisthésis v souvislosti s vnímáním jako takovým. Autor poukazuje na vazbu, kterou u Aristotela díky jeho práci ve fyziologii má obecná schopnost vnímat třetí klíčový pojem, který patří do etiky, totiž na fronésis. V rámci výkladu fronésis má místo také poslední bezprostředně relevantní pojem – orthos logos. Aristotelova koncepce jednání, jež Aristotelés vykládá někdy pomocí tzv. praktického sylogismu, pak ukazuje na roli uznávaných výroků jako typických obecných premis v těchto sylogismech a roli osob uznávaných pro svou fronésis jako měřítek určujících kritéria pro to, co je dobré jednání., The text interprets the particular concepts in Aristotle’s work which present themselves as candidates for being the counterpart to the modern concept of common sense, and it introduces them in their mutual relatedness. Aristotle works with the term endoxos, particularly in his logical and rhetorical texts, which he uses for statements and persons which are recognised in a given community. In epistemology he works with the term koiné aisthésis in connection with perception as such. The author points to a third concept, which Aristotle, thanks to his work in physiology, has a general ability to perceive, and which belongs to ethics: this is fronésis In an interpretation of fronésis there is also a place for the last directly relevant concept – orthos logos. Aristotle’s conception of conduct, which he sometimes interprets with the help of a so-called practical syllogism, displays the role of recognised statements as the typical general premisses in these syllogisms, and the role of persons recognised for their fronésis as the measure of the determining criteria for what is good conduct., and Petr Glombíček.
The article examines the meaning of the other for Kant's idea of autonomy. Autonomy is interpreted, in relation to the universal demand of the ethical, as governing the will by principles. Autonomy as principled self-determination by means of the practical law cannot be understood as the standpoint of an isolated subject. Instead we must understand it as a standpoint taken towards others, which we treat as the aspect of spontaneity, and at the same time as a standpoint taken thanks to others, since others make possible its awakening and development - here the aspect of receptivity is discussed. In this two-way relation between autonomy (enabled by a self-determining goverment by principle) and the other, the character of dialogical mutuality is exhibited: autonomy is the principled considerateness of a good will towards others, and, in order for it to be such, it must be initiated by others., Ondřej Sikora., and Obsahuje poznámky a bibliografii