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:
63 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 63
  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: Journal of Philosophy 47 (114):209-222.
  3. M. T. Antonelli (1948). H. Y. PATON, "The Categorical Imperative - A study in Kant's Moral, Philosophy". [REVIEW] Epistemologia 3 (5):535.
  4. Sorin Baiasu (2013). The Deontic Force of the Formula of Universal Law. In Margit Ruffing, Claudio La Rocca, Alfredo Ferrarin & Stefano Bacin (eds.), Kant Und Die Philosophie in Weltbürgerlicher Absicht: Akten des Xi. Kant-Kongresses 2010. De Gruyter. 41-50.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. H. Barker (1948). PATON, H. J. - The Categorical Imperative: A Study in Kant's Moral Philosophy. [REVIEW] Mind 57:93.
  8. E. J. Bond (1968). The Supreme Principle of Morality. Dialogue 7 (02):167-179.
  9. Matthew Braham & Martin van Hees (2015). The Formula of Universal Law: A Reconstruction. Erkenntnis 80 (2):243-260.
    This paper provides a methodologically original construction of Kant’s “Formula of Universal Law” . A formal structure consisting of possible worlds and games—a “game frame”—is used to implement Kant’s concept of a maxim and to define the two tests FUL comprises: the “contradiction in conception” and “contradiction in the will” tests. The paper makes two contributions. Firstly, the model provides a formal account of the variables that are built into FUL: agents, maxims, intentions, actions, and outcomes. This establishes a clear (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Steven M. Cahn (2009). A Supreme Moral Principle? In Exploring Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology. Oxford University Press.
  11. Lenval A. Callender (2013). Puzzle Maxims and the Formula of Universal Law. In Margit Ruffing, Claudio La Rocca, Alfredo Ferrarin & Stefano Bacin (eds.), Kant Und Die Philosophie in Weltbürgerlicher Absicht: Akten des Xi. Kant-Kongresses 2010. De Gruyter. 97-108.
  12. 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.
  13. 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  
  14. 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  
  15. Nythamar de Oliveira (2008). Humanity and Universalizability: A Kantian Interpretation of the Foundations of Human Rights. In Valerio Rohden (ed.), Recht und Frieden in der Philosophie Kants: Akten des X. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses. de Gruyter.
  16. Lara Denis (2007). Abortion and Kant's Formula of Universal Law. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 37 (4):547-579.
  17. 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  
  18. Paul Dietrichson (1964). When is a Maxim Fully Universalizable ? Kant-Studien 55 (1-4):143-170.
  19. Cristian Dimitriu (2013). The practical interpretation of the categorical imperative: A defense. Ideas Y Valores 62 (151):105-113.
    The article compares two different interpretations of Kant's categorical imperative −the practical and the logical one− and defends the practical one, arguing that it is superior because it rejects cases of free riding without necessarily rejecting cases of coordination or timing. The logical interpretation, on the other hand, leads to the undesirable outcome that it does not reject immoral cases of free riding, and to the desired outcome that it does not reject maxims of coordination/timing. Given that neither of them (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Gary Doore (1985). Contradiction in the Will. Kant-Studien 76 (1-4):138-151.
  21. 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  
  22. 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  
  23. 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  
  24. 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  
  25. Richard Galvin (2011). Maxims and Practical Contradictions. History of Philosophy Quarterly 28 (4):407.
  26. 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  
  27. Jens Gillessen (2014). Was, wenn jeder...? Ethische Verallgemeinerung seit Kant. Eine Kritik. Verlag Karl Alber.
    Occasionally, moral critique is often put forward by asking: What if everyone acted the way you do? Such criticism seems to be grounded in some form of moral reasoning, which has in the past been the aim of various efforts of clarification, refutation and defense, in the guise of interpretations of Kant's Categorical Imperative as well as in Analytic Ethics. The book forms the first monographic attempt since decades to establish systematic order among contributions to the field. It examines a (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. 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  
  29. M. S. Gram (1967). Kant and Universalizability Once More and Again. Kant-Studien 58 (1-4):301-312.
  30. 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.
  31. S. Holtman (2002). Civility and Hospitality: Justice and Social Grace in Trying Times. Kantian Review 6 (1):85-108.
    ‘[S]o act externally that the free use of your choice can coexist with the freedom of everyone in accordance with a universal law’ . This is Immanuel Kant's first principle of justice, stated in the imperative form appropriate for human beings, beings who can comply with it but who might not do so. For Kant it is a principle that applies not only to relations among citizens within a state, but to those among states themselves and among citizens of varying (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Christian Er Illies (2007). Orientation Through Universalisation: The Categorical Imperative as Test for the Morality of Maxim. Kant-Studien 98 (3):306-328.
  33. 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  
  34. O. C. Jensen (1934). Kant's Ethical Formalism. Philosophy 9 (34):195 - 208.
    The generally accepted interpretation of Kant's formula “act only on that maxim which thou canst at the same time will to be a universal law,” is roughly as follows:— Our moral experience is fundamentally a consciousness of the difference between Duty and Inclination, between "doing what we ought to whether we like to or not, and doing merely what we like whether we ought to or not."1 When we have open to our choice different acts, there are some which we (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. 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  
  36. Immanuel Kant, Preface to the Metaphysical Elements of Ethics.
  37. J. Kemp (1958). Kant's Examples of the Categorical Imperative. Philosophical Quarterly 8 (30):63-71.
  38. Halla Kim (2004). The Unity of Kant's Categorical Imperative. Southwest Philosophy Review 20 (1):75-82.
  39. Patricia Kitcher (2004). Kant's Argument for the Categorical Imperative. Noûs 38 (4):555-584.
  40. Patricia Kitcher (2003). What Is a Maxim? Philosophical Topics 31 (1/2):215-243.
  41. Christine M. Korsgaard (1985). Kant's Formula of Universal Law. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 66 (1-2):24.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Michael E. Levin (1974). Kant's Derivation of the Formula of Universal Law as an Ontological Argument. Kant-Studien 65 (1-4):50-66.
  43. Lotter Maria-Sibylla (2000). Das individuelle Gesetz. Zu Simmels Kritik an der Lebensfremdheit der kantischen Moralphilosophie. Kant-Studien 91 (2):178-203.
  44. Richard Mccarty (2010). Kant's Derivation of the Formula of Universal Law. Dialogue 49 (01):113-133.
    ABSTRACT: Critics have charged that there are gaps in the logic of Kant’s derivation of the formula of universal law. Here I defend that derivation against these charges, partly by emphasizing a neglected teleological principle that Kant alluded to in his argument, and partly by clarifying what he meant by actions’ “conformity to universal law.” He meant that actions conform to universal law just when their maxims can belong to a unified system of principles. An analogy with objects’ conformity to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Catriona McKinnon (2000). "The Kingdom of Ends as a Social Philosophy": Review: Kneller & Axinn , Autonomy and Community: Readings in Contemporary Kantian Social Philosophy. [REVIEW] Kantian Review 4 (1):138-148.
  46. Ted McNair (2000). Universal Necessity and Contradictions in Conception. Kant-Studien 91 (1):25-43.
  47. Sven Nyholm (2015). Kant's Universal Law Formula Revisited. Metaphilosophy 46 (2):280-299.
    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; 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 it, are based on various widely accepted interpretative assumptions. These assumptions, it is (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. 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  
  49. 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  
  50. 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.
1 — 50 / 63