David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Inquiry 49 (6):524 – 546 (2006)
Kantian constructivists locate the source of normativity in the rational nature of valuing agents. Some further argue that accepting this premise thereby commits one to accepting the intrinsic or unconditioned value of rational nature itself. Whereas much of the critical literature on this “regress on conditions” argument has focused either on the cogency of the inference from the value-conferring capacity of the will to the unconditional value of that capacity itself or on the plausibility of the initial constructivist premise, my aim is to press the argument from a different direction by asking just how Kantian the constructivist needs to be in order to support a regress on conditions argument. Specifically, I maintain that the argument succeeds only given a full-fledged Kantian moral psychology, including a presupposition of transcendental freedom. If correct, this could have implications regarding the compatibility of Kantian ethics and philosophic naturalism.
|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
Henry E. Allison (1990). Kant's Theory of Freedom. Cambridge University Press.
Hilary Bok (1998). Freedom and Responsibility. Princeton University Press.
Richard B. Brandt (1998). A Theory of the Good and the Right. Prometheus Books.
David Brink (1997). Kantian Rationalism: Inescapability, Authority, and Supremacy. In Garrett Cullity & Berys Nigel Gaut (eds.), Ethics and Practical Reason. Oxford University Press. 255--291.
David O. Brink (1987). Rawlsian Constructivism in Moral Theory. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 17 (1):71 - 90.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Anthony L. Brueckner (1983). Transcendental Arguments I. Noûs 17 (4):551-575.
R. Kevin Hill (2010). Nietzsche and the Transcendental Tradition (Review). Journal of Nietzsche Studies 39 (1):86-87.
Lara Denis (1999). Kant on the Perfection of Others. Southern Journal of Philosophy 37 (1):25-41.
Alison Hills (2008). Kantian Value Realism. Ratio 21 (2):182–200.
Anthony L. Brueckner (1984). Transcendental Arguments II. Noûs 18 (2):197-225.
Nishi Shah (2010). The Limits of Normative Detachment. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 110 (3pt3):347-371.
Christina Lafont (2004). Moral Objectivity and Reasonable Agreement: Can Realism Be Reconciled with Kantian Constructivism? Ratio Juris 17 (1):27-51.
Anthony Brueckner (1996). Modest Transcendental Arguments. Philosophical Perspectives 10 (Metaphysics):265-280.
Melissa Seymour Fahmy (2011). Love, Respect, and Interfering with Others. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (2):174-192.
Thomas M. Besch (2011). Kantian Constructivism, the Issue of Scope, and Perfectionism: O'Neill on Ethical Standing. European Journal of Philosophy 19 (1):1-20.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads39 ( #43,803 of 1,101,544 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #178,305 of 1,101,544 )
How can I increase my downloads?