This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
13 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
  1. Lara Denis (2007). Abortion and Kant's Formula of Universal Law. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 37 (4):547-580.
    The formula of universal law (FUL) is a natural starting point for philosophers interested in a Kantian perspective on the morality of abortion. I argue, however, that FUL does not yield much in the way of promising or substantive conclusions regarding the morality of abortion. I first reveal how two philosophers' (Hare's and Gensler's) attempts to use Kantian considerations of universality and prescriptivity fail to provide analyses of abortion that are either compelling or true to Kant=s understanding of FUL. I (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Gary Doore (1985). Contradiction in the Will. Kant-Studien 76 (1-4):138-151.
  3. Ronald Glass (1971). The Contradictions in Kant's Examples. Philosophical Studies 22 (5-6):65 - 70.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. M. S. Gram (1967). Kant and Universalizability Once More and Again. Kant-Studien 58 (1-4):301-312.
  5. N. G. E. Harris (1988). Imperfect Duties and Conflicts of Will. Kant-Studien 79 (1-4):33-42.
  6. Gary M. Hochberg (1973). A Re-Examination of the Contradictions in Kant's Examples. Philosophical Studies 24 (4):264 - 267.
  7. Brad Hooker, Kant's Normative Ethics.
    One central moral idea is that your doing some act is morally permissible only if others’ doing that act would also be morally permissible. There are a number of different ways of developing this idea. One is the suggestion that, before deciding to do some act, you should ask yourself ‘What if everyone did that?’ Another central moral idea is that it is immoral to ‘use’ people.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Noriaki Iwasa (2013). Reason Alone Cannot Identify Moral Laws. Journal of Value Inquiry 47 (1-2):67-85.
    Immanuel Kant's moral thesis is that reason alone must identify moral laws. Examining various interpretations of his ethics, this essay shows that the thesis fails. G. W. F. Hegel criticizes Kant's Formula of Universal Law as an empty formalism. Although Christine Korsgaard's Logical and Practical Contradiction Interpretations, Barbara Herman's contradiction in conception and contradiction in will tests, and Kenneth Westphal's paired use of Kant's universalization test all refute what Allen Wood calls a stronger form of the formalism charge, they are (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Shawn D. Kaplan (2005). A Critique of the Practical Contradiction Procedure for Testing Maxims. Kantian Review 10 (1):112-127.
  10. Ted McNair (2000). Universal Necessity and Contradictions in Conception. Kant-Studien 91 (1):25-43.
  11. Michael Rohlf (2009). Contradiction and Consent in Kant's Ethics. Journal of Value Inquiry 43 (4):507-520.
  12. Scott Stapleford (2007). On the Contradiction in Conception Test of the Categorical Imperative. South African Journal of Philosophy 26 (3):306-318.
    The author argues against Christine Korsgaard's influential interpretation of Kant's contradiction in conception test of the categorical imperative. Korsgaard's rejection of the ‘teleological' interpretation is shown to be based on a misunderstanding of the role that teleology plays for Kant in ruling out immoral maxims, and her defence of the ‘practical' interpretation is shown to be less faithful to the text than the competing ‘logical' interpretation. The works of Barbara Herman and Allen Wood are also discussed and evaluated.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Kenneth R. Westphal (1995). 'How "Full" is Kant's Categorical Imperative?'. Jahrbuch für Recht Und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 3:465-509.
    Through a careful examination of two detailed investigations of Kant’s Categorical Imperative (CI) as a criterion for determining correct action I show that Hegel’s widely castigated critique of Kant’s CI has significant merit. Kant holds that moral imperatives are categorical because the obligations they express do not depend upon our contingent ends or desires and he holds that the CI is the supreme normative principle. However, his actual illustrations show (1) that Kant repeatedly appeals to contingent ends and desires in (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation