On the Universal Law and Humanity Formulas
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Dissertation, University of Michigan (2012)
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 of a fully justified human morality. This dissertation offers new readings of these two formulas, shows how, on these readings, the formulas do indeed turn out being alternative statements of the same basic moral law, and in the process responds to many of the standard objections raised against Kant’s theory. Its first chapter briefly explores the ways in which Kant draws on his philosophical predecessors such as Plato (and especially Plato’s Republic) and Jean-Jacque Rousseau. The second chapter offers a new reading of the relation between the universal law and humanity formulas by relating both of these to a third formula of Kant’s, the “Law of Nature” formula, and also to Kant’s ideas about laws in general and human nature in particular. The third chapter considers and rejects some influential recent attempts to understand Kant’s argument for the humanity formula, and offers an alternative reconstruction instead. Chapter four considers what it is to flourish as a human being in line with Kant’s basic formulas of morality, and argues that the standard readings of the humanity formula cannot properly account for its relation to Kant’s views about the highest human good.
|Keywords||Kant Universal Law Formula Humanity Formula Korsgaard Flourishing Highest Good End in itself Ethical State of Nature Stoicism Autonomy|
|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
Noriaki Iwasa (2013). Reason Alone Cannot Identify Moral Laws. Journal of Value Inquiry 47 (1-2):67-85.
Joshua Glasgow (2007). Kant's Conception of Humanity. Journal of the History of Philosophy 45 (2):291-308.
Lara Denis (2007). Abortion and Kant's Formula of Universal Law. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 37 (4):547-580.
Adrienne M. Martin (2006). How to Argue for the Value of Humanity. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (1):96–125.
Lara Denis (2007). Kant's Formula of the End in Itself: Some Recent Debates. Philosophy Compass 2 (2):244–257.
Japa Pallikkathayil (2010). Deriving Morality From Politics: Rethinking the Formula of Humanity. Ethics 121 (1):116-147.
William Nelson (2008). Kant's Formula of Humanity. Mind 117 (465):85-106.
Christopher Arroyo (2011). Freedom and the Source of Value: Korsgaard and Wood on Kant's Formula of Humanity. Metaphilosophy 42 (4):353-359.
Lara Denis (1997). Kant's Ethics and Duties to Oneself. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):321–348.
Scott Forschler (2010). Willing Universal Law Vs. Universally Lawful Willing. Southwest Philosophy Review 26 (1):141-152.
Richard Dean (2006). The Value of Humanity in Kant's Moral Theory. Oxford University Press.
Samuel J. Kerstein (2002). Kant's Search for the Supreme Principle of Morality. Cambridge University Press.
Samuel C. Rickless (2004). From the Good Will to the Formula of Universal Law. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68 (3):554–577.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-07-15
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?