David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Cambridge University Press (1996)
Ethical concepts are, or purport to be, normative. They make claims on us: they command, oblige, recommend, or guide. Or at least when we invoke them, we make claims on one another; but where does their authority over us - or ours over one another - come from? Christine Korsgaard identifies four accounts of the source of normativity that have been advocated by modern moral philosophers: voluntarism, realism, reflective endorsement, and the appeal to autonomy. She traces their history, showing how each developed in response to the prior one and comparing their early versions with those on the contemporary philosophical scene. Kant's theory that normativity springs from our own autonomy emerges as a synthesis of the other three, and Korsgaard concludes with her own version of the Kantian account. Her discussion is followed by commentary from G. A. Cohen, Raymond Geuss, Thomas Nagel, and Bernard Williams, and a reply by Korsgaard.
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$16.77 used (53% off) $23.98 new (32% off) $28.42 direct from Amazon (19% off) Amazon page|
|Call number||BJ1458.3.K67 1996|
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
Jonny Anomaly (2008). Personal Identity and Practical Reason. Dialogue 47 (02):331-.
Sharon Street (2010). What is Constructivism in Ethics and Metaethics? Philosophy Compass 5 (5):363-384.
Christian Coons (2011). How to Prove That Some Acts Are Wrong (Without Using Substantive Moral Premises). Philosophical Studies 155 (1):83–98.
Ruth Chang (2013). Grounding Practical Normativity: Going Hybrid. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 164 (1):163-187.
Nicholas Southwood (2013). “The Thing To Do” Implies “Can”. Noûs 47 (3):n/a-n/a.
Similar books and articles
Krist Vaesen (2006). How Norms in Technology Ought to Be Interpreted. Techne 10 (1):117-133.
Ruth Chang (2009). Voluntarist Reasons and the Sources of Normativity. In David Sobel & Steven Wall (eds.), Reasons for Action. Cambridge University Press.
Christine M. Korsgaard, Interview with Korsgaard: Internalism and the Sources of Normativity (Corrected Version).
Tea Logar (2005). Moral Obligations and Practical Identities. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 5 (14):359-372.
David Cummiskey (2011). Korsgaard's Rejection of Consequentialism. Metaphilosophy 42 (4):360-367.
Joshua Gert (2002). Korsgaard's Private-Reasons Argument. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (2):303-324.
Wendy Donner (1999). The Sources of Normativity Christine M. Korsgaard, with G. A. Cohen, Raymond Geuss, Thomas Nagel, and Bernard Williams Onora O'Neill, Editor Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, Xv + 273 Pp. [REVIEW] Dialogue 38 (03):653-.
Ken O'Day (1998). Normativity and Interpersonal Reasons. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 1 (1):61-87.
Michael Smith (1999). Search for the Source. [REVIEW] Philosophical Quarterly 49 (196):384–394.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads112 ( #10,803 of 1,140,380 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #19,850 of 1,140,380 )
How can I increase my downloads?