David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Journal of Philosophical Studies 17 (1):71 – 94 (2009)
Since more than 50 years Kant scholars debate the question whether the Law of Right as introduced in the Metaphysics of Morals by Kant can be justified by the Categorical Imperative. On the one hand we have those who think that Kant's theory of right depends from the Categorical Imperative, on the other hand we find a growing group of scholars who deny this. However, the debate has been flawed by confusion and misunderstanding of the crucial terms and principles. Therefore, my first task will be to clarify these terms and principles by introducing distinctions that have been neglected too often. After this I try to show a) that the Law of Right can in fact be justified by using the testing method the Categorical Imperative prescribes and b) that there is no other way to justify it. Doing this I criticize in detail the new arguments adherents of the independence thesis have recently put forward.
|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
Arthur Ripstein (2009). Force and Freedom: Kant's Legal and Political Philosophy. Harvard University Press.
Arthur Ripstein (2004). Authority and Coercion. Philosophy and Public Affairs 32 (1):2–35.
Paul Guyer (2002). Kant's Deductions of the Principles of Right. In Mark Timmons (ed.), Kant's Metaphysics of Morals: Interpretative Essays. Clarendon Press
Hariolf Oberer (2010). Noch einmal zu Kants Rechtsbegründung. Kant-Studien 101 (3):380-393.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Marcus Arvan (2012). Unifying the Categorical Imperative. Southwest Philosophy Review 28 (1):217-225.
Lee Anne Peck (2007). Sapere Aude! The Importance of a Moral Education in Kant's Doctrine of Virtue. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 22 (2 & 3):208 – 214.
Marcus Willaschek (2009). Right and Coercion: Can Kant's Conception of Right Be Derived From His Moral Theory? International Journal of Philosophical Studies 17 (1):49 – 70.
R. K. Gupta (1997). Notes on Kant's Derivation of the Various Formulae of the Categorical Imperative. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 5 (3):383 – 396.
Samuel J. Kerstein (2002). Kant's Search for the Supreme Principle of Morality. Cambridge University Press.
Derek Parfit (2006). Kant's Arguments for His Formula of Universal Law. In Christine Sypnowich (ed.), The Egalitarian Conscience: Essays in Honour of G. A. Cohen. OUP Oxford
Oliver Sensen (2011). Kant's Conception of Inner Value. European Journal of Philosophy 19 (2):262-280.
Joel J. Kupperman (2002). A Messy Derivation of the Categorical Imperative. Philosophy 77 (4):485-502.
Kenneth R. Westphal (1997). Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct? Jahrbuch für Recht Und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 5:141-194.
Added to index2009-03-08
Total downloads61 ( #72,425 of 1,911,740 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #254,551 of 1,911,740 )
How can I increase my downloads?