@article {palovicova_z2005:1197,
	title = {Sokratovsk{\'a} ot{\'a}zka Ako m{\'a}m {\v z}i{\v t} a s{\'u}{\v c}asn{\'a} mor{\'a}lna vo{\v l}ba},
	journal = {Filozofia},
	volume = {60},
	number = {6},
	year = {2005},
	pages = {383-398},
	type = {State},
	abstract = {The aim of the paper is to find out, whether in situation of several competitive concepts, when the traditional justification of morals and the validity of conventional moral concepts are questioned, an ethical theory acceptable for everybody is possible. Which should be the ground of such theory, uniting (and not excluding) the particular ethical approaches? According to the author moral philosophy responding to contemporary developments should go back to the question from Plato{\textquoteright}s Gorgias: {\quotedblbase}How should I live?{\textquotedblleft} This question is directly connected with further questions: {\quotedblbase}What in life is really valuable?{\textquotedblleft}; {\quotedblbase}What in life is worth following?{\textquotedblleft}; {\quotedblbase}What actions and life objectives are valuable?{\textquotedblleft}; {\quotedblbase}What is the best way of leaving our lifes?{\textquotedblleft} All these questions are closely connected with another one: {\quotedblbase}From what perspective can we judge the values of the prospective elements of life?{\textquotedblleft} Put in another words: {\quotedblbase}How can I know, how should I live?{\textquotedblleft} This conception draws strongly on William{\textquoteright}s attempt at restoring the question {\quotedblbase}How should I live?{\textquotedblleft} as the first question of moral philosophy.},
	author = {Palovi{\v c}ov{\'a}, Zuzana}
}
