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:
17 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
  1. Reshef Agam-Segal (2012). Kant's Non-Aristotelian Conception of Morality. Sounthwest Philosophy Review 28 (1):121-133.
    Interpreters today often take Kant’s practical philosophy to share some of the basic insights of Aristotle’s. Such, for instance, is the main tone of Christine Korsgaard’s reading. I make a case for a different, non-Aristotelian, reading of Kant’s moral philosophy. In particular, I distinguish between two senses of self-legislation: Aristotelian and Kantian. Aristotelian self-legislation is a general project we are involved in as humans, and in which we determine the organizing principle of our practical life. Every action of ours takes (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Robert Arp (2007). Vindicating Kant's Morality. International Philosophical Quarterly 47 (1):5-22.
    Among others, four significant criticisms have been leveled against Kant’s morality. These criticisms are that Kant’s morality lacks a motivational component, thatit ignores the spiritual dimensions of morality espoused by a virtue-based ethics, that it overemphasizes the principle of autonomy in neglecting the communal context of morality, and that it lacks a theological foundation in being detached from God. In this paper I attempt to show that, when understood in the broader context of his religious doctrines and the overall philosophical (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Gary Banham (2010). Ethics Vindicated: Kant's Transcendental Legitimation of Moral Discourse. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 13 (1):111-112.
    This is a short review of a work by Bencivenga on Kant's ethics that argues for a view of Kant that treats his moral rules as not prescriptive but only transcendental and takes issue with this reading.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Anne Margaret Baxley (2012). The Problem of Obligation, the Finite Rational Will, and Kantian Value Realism. Inquiry 55 (6):567-583.
    Abstract Robert Stern's Understanding Moral Obligation is a remarkable achievement, representing an original reading of Kant's contribution to modern moral philosophy and the legacy he bequeathed to his later-eighteenth- and early-nineteenth-century successors in the German tradition. On Stern's interpretation, it was not the threat to autonomy posed by value realism, but the threat to autonomy posed by the obligatory nature of morality that led Kant to develop his critical moral theory grounded in the concept of the self-legislating moral agent. Accordingly, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Anthony F. Beavers (2000). Kant and the Problem of Ethical Metaphysics. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 7 (2-3):11-20.
    The ethical philosophies of Kant and Levinas would seem, on the surface, to be incompatible. In this essay. I attempt to reconcile them by situating Levinas’s philosophy “beneath” Kant’s as its existential condition thereby addressing two shortcomings in each of their works, for Kant. the apparent difficulty of making ethics apply to real concrete cases, and, for Levinas, the apparent difficulty of establishing a normative ethics that can offer prescriptions for moral behavior. My general thesis is that the existential ethical (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Katerina Deligiorgi (2012). Review: Engstrom, The Form of Practical Knowledge: A Study of the Categorical Imperative. [REVIEW] Kantian Review 17 (2):369-374.
  7. Paul Formosa (2013). Is Kant a Moral Constructivist or a Moral Realist? European Journal of Philosophy 21 (2):170-196.
    : The dominant interpretation of Kant as a moral constructivist has recently come under sustained philosophical attack by those defending a moral realist reading of Kant. In light of this, should we read Kant as endorsing moral constructivism or moral realism? In answering this question we encounter disagreement in regard to two key independence claims. First, the independence of the value of persons from the moral law (an independence that is rejected) and second, the independence of the content and authority (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. 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  
  9. Thomas Hurka, On Audi's Marriage of Ross and Kant.
    As its title suggests, Robert Audi’s The Good in the Right1 defends an intuitionist moral view like W.D. Ross’s in The Right and the Good. Ross was an intuitionist, first, in metaethics, where he held that there are self-evident moral truths that can be known by intuition. But he was also an intuitionist in the different sense used in normative ethics, since he held that there are irreducibly many such truths. Some concern the intrinsic goods, which are in turn plural, (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Charles Larmore (2003). Back to Kant? No Way. Inquiry 46 (2):260 – 271.
  11. Robert B. Louden (2012). Review: Jost & Wuerth (Eds), Perfecting Virtue: New Essays on Kantian Ethics and Virtue Ethics. [REVIEW] Kantian Review 17 (1):161-166.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Robert B. Louden (1986). Kant's Virtue Ethics. Philosophy 61 (238):473 - 489.
  13. Jens Saugstad (2003). Levinas-debatten: et punktum. Norsk Filosofisk Tidsskrift 38 (3):238-240.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. J. Brenton Stearns (1965). Ideal Rule Utilitarianism and the Content of Duty. Kant-Studien 56 (1):53-70.
    This is an attempt to understand the ethics of leonard nelson as dealing with some of the same problems arising from kant's moral philosophy as have concerned the rule utilitarians in anglo-American philosophy. In particular, They share the attempt to provide a rationale for specific duties in terms of ends to be achieved, And they try to correct what they see as excessive rigidity and formalism in the kantian imperatives.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Sergio Tenenbaum (2011). Review of Christine Korsgaard's "Self-Constitution&Quot;. [REVIEW] Ethics 121 (2):449-455.
  16. Jens Timmermann (2010). Reversal or Retreat? Kant's Deductions of Freedom and Morality. In Andrews Reath & Jens Timmermann (eds.), Kant's Critique of Practical Reason: A Critical Guide. Cambridge University Press.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Jens Timmermann (2005). Good but Not Required?—Assessing the Demands of Kantian Ethics. Journal of Moral Philosophy 2 (1):9-27.
    There seems to be a strong sentiment in pre-philosophical moral thought that actions can be morally valuable without at the same time being morally required. Yet Kant, who takes great pride in developing an ethical system firmly grounded in common moral thought, makes no provision for any such extraordinary acts of virtue. Rather, he supports a classification of actions as either obligatory, permissible or prohibited, which in the eyes of his critics makes it totally inadequate to the facts of morality. (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation