David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Kant-Studien 100 (3):332-345 (2009)
This paper examines the methodological problem of casuistry by reference to Immanuel Kant's position on it. He addressed “Casuistical Questions” in his last work on ethics, Metaphysik der Sitten , in order to defend his position against attacks from scholars defending an Aristotelian (and also Ciceronian) eudemonistic viewpoint. It is argued that Kantian casuistry has much in common with the Aristotelian idea of emphasizing the moral objectives and sensibility of an agent in concrete circumstances. Nevertheless, Kant did not entirely adopt the case-oriented ethical perspective because he saw the moral duty as the „wide“ one. Moral duties are wide in the sense that they demand continuous self-examination: asking whether there might be a better way to limit one's maxim by another. According to Kant, although casuistry as a case study could give moral law or duties more practicability through the training of moral judgment, the moral agent cannot use with individual cases in order to modify or devise new moral rules or duties.
|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
Margit Ruffing (2011). Kant-Bibliographie 2009. Kant-Studien 102 (4):499-540.
Similar books and articles
Hugo Adam Bedau (1997). Making Mortal Choices: Three Exercises in Moral Casuistry. Oxford University Press.
David E. Boeyink (1992). Casuistry: A Case-Based Methods for Journalists. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 7 (2):107 – 120.
Sandra L. Borden (1999). Character as a Safeguard for Journalists Using Case-Based Ethical Reasoning. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 13 (1):93-104.
Kevin Wm Wildes (1993). The Priesthood of Bioethics and the Return of Casuistry. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 18 (1):33-49.
Theo Van Willigenburg (1998). New Casuistry: What's New? Philosophical Explorations 1 (2):152 – 164.
Richard Brian Miller (1996). Casuistry and Modern Ethics: A Poetics of Practical Reasoning. University of Chicago Press.
Gregory E. Kaebnick (2000). On the Intersection of Casuistry and Particularism. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 10 (4):307-322.
Martin Calkins (2001). Casuistry and the Business Case Method. Business Ethics Quarterly 11 (2):237-259.
John D. Arras (1991). Getting Down to Cases: The Revival of Casuistry in Bioethics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (1):29-51.
Emer O'Hagan (2009). Moral Self-Knowledge in Kantian Ethics. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (5):525-537.
Added to index2009-09-17
Total downloads63 ( #24,224 of 1,102,698 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #84,360 of 1,102,698 )
How can I increase my downloads?