David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Kant believed that the moral law is a law that the rational will legislates. This thesis examines this claim and its broader implications for Kant’s moral theory. Many are drawn to Kantian ethics because of its emphasis on the dignity and legislative authority of the rational being. The attractiveness of this emphasis on the special standing and capacities of the self grounds a recent tendency to interpret Kantian autonomy as a doctrine according to which individual agents create binding moral norms. Where this line is taken, however, its advocates face deep questions concerning the compatibility of autonomy and the conception of moral requirement to which Kant is also certainly committed – one which conceives of the moral law as a strictly universal and necessary imperative. This thesis has two main aims. In the first half, I offer an interpretation of Kantian autonomy that both accommodates the universality and necessity of moral constraint and takes seriously the notion that the rational will is a legislator of moral law. As a means of developing and securing my preferred view, I argue that recent popular interpretations of Kantian autonomy fail to resolve the tensions that seem at first glance to plague the concept of self-legislation, where what is at stake is the legislation of a categorical imperative. In the second half of this thesis, I examine the connections between my preferred interpretation of self-legislation and Kant’s dichotomisation of reason and our sensuous nature. I argue that some of the more harsh and seemingly unreasonable aspects of Kant’s moral philosophy can be defended by bringing to light the ways in which they are connected to his commitment both to the autonomy of the will and to developing a genuinely normative ethics.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
T. H. Irwin (2011). Continuity in the History of Autonomy. Inquiry 54 (5):442 - 459.
Andrews Reath (2006). Agency and Autonomy in Kant's Moral Theory. Oxford University Press.
Robert S. Taylor (2005). Kantian Personal Autonomy. Political Theory 33 (5):602-628.
Barbara Secker (1999). The Appearance of Kant's Deontology in Contemporary Kantianism: Concepts of Patient Autonomy in Bioethics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 24 (1):43 – 66.
Patrick Kain (2004). Self-Legislation in Kant's Moral Philosophy. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 86 (3):257-306.
Eric Entrican Wilson (2008). Kantian Autonomy and the Moral Self. Review of Metaphysics 62 (2):355-381.
Matthew Caswell (2006). Kant's Conception of the Highest Good, the Gesinnung, and the Theory of Radical Evil. Kant-Studien 97 (2):184-209.
Lara Denis (2005). Autonomy and the Highest Good. Kantian Review 10 (1):33-59.
Added to index2010-07-22
Total downloads12 ( #138,003 of 1,140,379 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #140,193 of 1,140,379 )
How can I increase my downloads?