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:
48 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
  1. Henry E. Allison (1991). On a Presumed Gap in the Derivation of the Categorical Imperative. Philosophical Topics 19 (1):1-15.
  2. Guido Antônio Almeiddea (2006). Sobre o Princípio E a Lei Universal Do Direito Em Kant. Kriterion 47 (114):209-222.
  3. Tom Bailey (2001). Review: Wood, Kant's Ethical Thought & Louden, Kant's Impure Ethics: From Rational Beings to Human Beings. [REVIEW] Kantian Review 5:119-128.
  4. Tom Bailey (2001). Review: Wood, Kant's Ethical Thought & Louden, Kant's Impure Ethics: From Rational Beings to Human Beings. [REVIEW] Kantian Review 5 (1):119-128.
  5. Andrew Chignell (2006). Review: Moore, Noble in Reason, Infinite in Faculty: Themes and Varitation in Kant's Moral and Religious Philosophy. [REVIEW] Philosophical Review 115 (1):118-121.
  6. Adam Cureton (2013). A Contractualist Reading of Kant's Proof of the Formula of Humanity. Kantian Review 18 (3):363-386.
    Kant offers the following argument for the formula of humanity (FH): Each rational agent necessarily conceives of her own rational nature as an end in itself and does so on the same grounds as every other rational agent, so all rational agents must conceive of one another's rational nature as an end in itself. As it stands, the argument appears to be question-begging and fallacious. Drawing on resources from the formula of universal law (FUL) and Kant's claims about the primacy (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Adam Cureton (2013). From Self-Respect to Respect for Others. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 94 (2):166-187.
    The leading accounts of respect for others usually assume that persons have a rational nature, which is a marvelous thing, so they should be respected like other objects of ‘awesome’ value. Kant's views about the ‘value’ of humanity, which have inspired contemporary discussions of respect, have been interpreted in this way. I propose an alternative interpretation in which Kant proceeds from our own rational self-regard, through our willingness to reciprocate with others, to duties of respect for others. This strategy, which (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. 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  
  9. Paul Dietrichson (1964). When is a Maxim Fully Universalizable ? Kant-Studien 55 (1-4):143-170.
  10. Gary Doore (1985). Contradiction in the Will. Kant-Studien 76 (1-4):138-151.
  11. G. C. Field (1932). Kant's First Moral Principle. Mind 41 (161):17-36.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Scott Forschler (2013). Kantian and Consequentialist Ethics: The Gap Can Be Bridged. Metaphilosophy 44 (1-2):88-104.
    Richard Hare argues that the fundamental assumptions of Kant's ethical system should have led Kant to utilitarianism, had Kant not confused a norm's generality with its universality, and hence adopted rigorist, deontological norms. Several authors, including Jens Timmermann, have argued contra Hare that the gap between Kantian and utilitarian/consequentialist ethics is fundamental and cannot be bridged. This article shows that Timmermann's claims rely on a systematic failure to separate normative and metaethical aspects of each view, and that Hare's attempt to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Scott Forschler (2012). From Supervenience to “Universal Law”: How Kantian Ethics Become Heteronomous. In Dietmar Heidemann (ed.), Kant and Contemporary Moral Philosophy. De Gruyter.
    In his Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant’s desiderata for a supreme principle of practical reasoning and morality require that the subjective conditions under which some action is thought of as justified via some maxim be sufficient for judging the same action as justified by any agent in those conditions. This describes the kind of universalization conditions now known as moral supervenience. But when he specifies his “formula of universal law” (FUL) Kant replaces this condition with a quite different (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Scott Forschler (2010). Willing Universal Law Vs. Universally Lawful Willing. Southwest Philosophy Review 26 (1):141-152.
    Kant's formula of universal law appears to fail in some cases, producing false negatives and false positives. Adding further qualifications to one's maxims can fix the first problem, but not all of the latter. In particular, there are maxims which generate no contradiction in will when practiced universally, but which are irrational to will that some agent follow in contexts where it is known that other agents are not following it. This reveals that Kant's conception of "universalization" is too narrow: (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Richard Galvin (2009). The Universal Law Formulas. In Thomas E. Hill (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Kant's Ethics. Wiley-Blackwell.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Joshua M. Glasgow (2003). Expanding the Limits of Universalization: Kant's Duties and Kantian Moral Deliberation. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 33 (1):23 - 47.
    Despite all the attention given to Kant’s universalizability tests, one crucial aspect of Kant’s thought is often overlooked. Attention to this issue, I will argue, helps us resolve two serious problems for Kant’s ethics. Put briefly, the first problem is this: Kant, despite his stated intent to the contrary, doesn’t seem to use universalization in arguing for duties to oneself, and, anyway, it is not at all clear why duties to oneself should be grounded on a procedure that envisions a (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. M. S. Gram (1967). Kant and Universalizability Once More and Again. Kant-Studien 58 (1-4):301-312.
  18. Paul Guyer (2002). Ends of Reason and Ends of Nature: The Place of Teleology in Kant's Ethics. [REVIEW] Journal of Value Inquiry 36 (2-3):161-186.
  19. S. Holtman (2002). Civility and Hospitality: Justice and Social Grace in Trying Times. Kantian Review 6 (1):85-108.
  20. Christian Er Illies (2007). Orientation Through Universalisation: The Categorical Imperative as Test for the Morality of Maxim. Kant-Studien 98 (3):306-328.
  21. 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  
  22. O. C. Jensen (1934). Kant's Ethical Formalism. Philosophy 9 (34):195 - 208.
  23. Robert Johnson (2009). The Moral Law as Causal Law. In Jens Timmermann (ed.), Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide. Cambridge University Press.
    Much recent work on Kant's argument that the Categorical Imperative is the fundamental principle of morality has focused on the gap in that argument between the conclusion that rational agents conform to laws that apply to every rational agent, and the requirement contained in the Universal Law of Nature formula.1 While it seems plausible – even trivial– that a rational agent, insofar as she is a rational agent, conforms to whatever laws there are that are valid for all rational agents, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Immanuel Kant, Preface to the Metaphysical Elements of Ethics.
  25. J. Kemp (1958). Kant's Examples of the Categorical Imperative. Philosophical Quarterly 8 (30):63-71.
  26. Halla Kim (2004). The Unity of Kant's Categorical Imperative. Southwest Philosophy Review 20 (1):75-82.
  27. Patricia Kitcher (2004). Kant's Argument for the Categorical Imperative. Noûs 38 (4):555-584.
  28. Patricia Kitcher (2003). What Is a Maxim? Philosophical Topics 31 (1/2):215-243.
  29. Christine M. Korsgaard (1985). Kant's Formula of Universal Law. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 66 (1-2).
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Michael E. Levin (1974). Kant's Derivation of the Formula of Universal Law as an Ontological Argument. Kant-Studien 65 (1-4):50-66.
  31. Lotter Maria-Sibylla (2000). Das individuelle Gesetz. Zu Simmels Kritik an der Lebensfremdheit der kantischen Moralphilosophie. Kant-Studien 91 (2):178-203.
  32. Richard Mccarty (2010). Kant's Derivation of the Formula of Universal Law. Dialogue 49 (01):113-133.
  33. Catriona McKinnon (2000). &Quot;the Kingdom of Ends as a Social Philosophy&Quot;: Review: Kneller & Axinn (Ed), Autonomy and Community: Readings in Contemporary Kantian Social Philosophy. [REVIEW] Kantian Review 4:138-148.
  34. Ted McNair (2000). Universal Necessity and Contradictions in Conception. Kant-Studien 91 (1):25-43.
  35. Sven Nyholm (forthcoming). Kant's Universal Law Formula Revisited. Metaphilosophy.
    Kantians are increasingly deserting the universal law formula in favor of the humanity formula. The former, they argue, is open to various decisive objections; the two are not equivalent (since the latter, but not the former asserts a basic substantive value judgment); and it is only by appealing to the humanity formula that Kant can reliably generate substantive implications from his theory of an acceptable sort. These assessments of the universal law formula, which clash starkly with Kant’s own assessment of (...)
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Sven Nyholm (2013). On Kant's Idea of Humanity as an End in Itself. European Journal of Philosophy 21 (2).
    Writers like Christine Korsgaard and Allen Wood understand Kant's idea of rational nature as an end in itself as a commitment to a substantive value. This makes it hard for them to explain the supposed equivalence between the universal law and humanity formulations of the categorical imperative, since the former does not appear to assert any substantive value. Nor is it easy for defenders of value-based readings to explain Kant's claim that the law-giving nature of practical reason makes all beings (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Sven Nyholm (2012). On the Universal Law and Humanity Formulas. Dissertation, University of Michigan
    Whereas the universal law formula says to choose one’s basic guiding principles (or “maxims”) on the basis of their fitness to serve as universal laws, the humanity formula says to always treat the humanity in each person as an end, and never as a means only. Commentators and critics have been puzzled by Kant’s claims that these are two alternative statements of the same basic law, and have raised various objections to Kant’s suggestion that these are the most basic formulas (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Derek Parfit (2006). Kant's Arguments for His Formula of Universal Law. In Christine Sypnowich (ed.), The Egalitarian Conscience: Essays in Honour of G. A. Cohen. Oup Oxford.
  39. Theodosios N. Pelegrinēs (1980). Kant's Conceptions of the Categorical Imperative and the Will. Zeno.
  40. Marek Piechowiak (2011). Klasyczna Koncepcja Osoby Jako Podstawa Pojmowania Praw Człowieka. Wokół Tomasza Z Akwinu I Immanuela Kanta Propozycji Ugruntowania Godności Człowieka. In Piotr Dardziński, Franciszek Longchamps de Bérier & Krzysztof Szczucki (eds.), Prawo naturalne – natura prawa. C. H. Beck. 3-20.
    Za „ojca” filozoficznej kategorii „godności”, która legła u podstaw kategorii prawnej, uznawany jest powszechnie Immanuel Kant. Przypomnieć jednak trzeba, że w bardzo podobny sposób, choć w zasadniczo odmiennym kontekście systemowym, charakteryzował godność Tomasz z Akwinu, pół tysiąca lat wcześniej, uznając ją za fundament bycia osobą. Stąd najistotniejszym i centralnym elementem, tytułowej, klasycznej koncepcji człowieka jest koncepcja godności. Akwinata jest autorem bodaj najbardziej rozbudowanej koncepcji osoby w tradycji filozofii klasycznej. Co więcej zmierzać będę do wykazania, że jego koncepcja lepiej nadaje się (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Michael Rohlf (2009). Kant on Determining One's Duty: A Middle Course Between Rawls and Herman. Kant-Studien 100 (3):346-368.
    This paper develops an interpretation of the relationship between Kant's various formulations of the categorical imperative in the Groundwork that steers a middle course between the formal and substantive poles of the interpretive spectrum, represented by John Rawls and Barbara Herman, respectively. Accepting and rejecting key aspects of both Rawls's and Herman's interpretations, I argue that the first formulation, understood correctly, does suffice to determine all Kantian moral duties, but only if duties are regarded as situation-specific rather than standing obligations. (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Uuno Saarnio (1966). Die logische grundlage der formalen ethik Immanuel kants. Kant-Studien 57 (1-4):484-499.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Sally Sedgwick (2011). 'Letting the Phenomena In': On How Herman's Kantianism Does and Does Not Answer the Empty Formalism Critique. Kantian Review 16 (1):33-47.
  44. Sally S. Sedgwick (1988). Hegel's Critique of the Subjective Idealism of Kant's Ethics. Journal of the History of Philosophy 26 (1):89-105.
    In paragraph 135 of the Philosophy of Right Hegel formulates his well-known objection to the" empty formalism" of Kant's theory of morality:"[I] f the definition of duty is taken to be the absence of contradiction," he tells us,"... then no transition is possible to the specification ..
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Andrew Sneddon (2011). A New Kantian Response to Maxim-Fiddling. Kantian Review 16 (1):67-88.
    There has long been a suspicion that Kant's test for the universalizability of maxims can be easily subverted: instead of risking failing the test, design your maxim for any action whatsoever in a manner guaranteed to pass. This is the problem of maxim-fiddling. The present discussion of this problem has two theses: 1] That extant approaches to maxim-fiddling are not satisfactory;2] That a satisfactory response to maxim-fiddling can be articulated using Kantian resources, especially the first two formulations of the categorical (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Jeppe von Platz (2013). Review: Allison, Kant's Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals: A Commentary. [REVIEW] Kantian Review 18 (2):317-322.
  47. Jonathan Webber (2012). A Law Unto Oneself. Philosophical Quarterly 62 (246):170-189.
    We should understand the concept of self-legislation that is central to Kant's moral philosophy not in terms of the enactment of statute, but in terms of the way in which judges make law, by setting down and refining precedent through particular judgements. This paper presents a descriptive model of agency based on self-legislation so understood, and argues that we can read Kant's normative ethics as based on this view of agency. It is intended to contribute to contemporary debates in moral (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Garrath Williams (1999). Kant and the Question of Meaning. Philosophical Forum 30 (2):115–131.
    This paper discusses Kant’s problematic attempts to come to grips with the question of meaning. The first section sets out the problem as Kant discovers it, under the idea of a ‘Categorical Imperative.’ The second looks directly at his thoughts on the question of meaning, in connection with individual dignity, personal fulfilment and hope for our common future. Third, I examine inadequacies in Kant’s account, while the fourth part suggests that these arise through a lack of faith in the practical (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation