Skip to main content
Log in

Korsgaard’s Moral Theory ln the Light of Kant’s Architectonics

  • Published:
Philosophia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In The Sources of Normativity Korsgaard introduces her conception of practical identities understood as the source of moral obligations. This conception forms a point of transition from Korsgaard’s theory of action to her solution to the problem of the authority of moral norms. In order to describe how universal categorical reasoning is compatible with the moral content of particular practical decisions, Korsgaard needs to show how our contingent practical identities can be reconciled with what she defines as the universally shared identity that expresses our humanity. To make this reconciliation work, she devises an argument for the public shareability of reasons amended by her reinterpretation of the Kantian as if principle. I suggest that, in doing so, Korsgaard steps too far away from Kant’s architectonic approach to the question of why moral norms bind us, and that, consequently, the Korsgaardian reconciliation between the two kinds of identities, as it stands, cannot be accomplished.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Cholby, M. (1999). Egoism and the publicity of reason: A reply to Korsgaard. Social Theory and Practice, 25(3), 491–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engstrom, S. (2009). The form of practical knowledge: A study of the categorical imperative. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Geuss, R. (1996). Morality and identity. In C. Korsgaard et al. (Eds.), The sources of normativity (pp. 189–199). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ginsborg, H. (2011). Primitive normativity and skepticism about rules. The Journal of Philosophy, 108(5), 227–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gowans, C. (2002). Practical identities and autonomy: Korsgaard’s reformation of Kant’s moral philosophy. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 64(3), 546–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyer, P. (1990). Feeling and freedom: Kant on aesthetics and Morality. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 48(2), 137–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyer, P. (2014). Kant. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Henrich, D. (1994). Aesthetic judgment and the moral image of the world: Studies in Kant. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1914). Critique of Judgement (Trans. by Bernard J.). London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1929). Critique of Pure Reason (Trans. by Smith N.). New York: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (2002). Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (Trans. by Wood A.). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher, P. (2004). Kant’s argument for the categorical imperative. Noûs, 38(4), 555–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kong, C. (2012). The Normative Source of Kantian Hypothetical Imperatives. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 20(5), 661–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korsgaard, C. (1996). The sources of normativity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Korsgaard, C. (1999). Creating the kingdom of ends. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korsgaard, C. (2009). Self-constitution: Agency, identity, and integrity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, R. (2000). Public reasons and the “private language” argument. Philosophical Investigations, 23(4), 292–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Day, K. (1998). Normativity and interpersonal reasons. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 1, 61–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Hagan, E. (2004). Practical identity and the constitution of agency. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 38, 49–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paton, H. (1947). The categorical imperative: A study in Kant’s moral philosophy. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelegrinis, T. (1984). Kant’s conception of the categorical imperative and the will. London: Zeno.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pippin, R. (1996). The significance of taste: Kant, aesthetic and reflective judgment. The Journal of the History of Philosophy, 34(4), 549–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, J. (Ed.). (1995). Aristotle’s physics. A Guided Study. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skorupski, J. (1998). Rescuing moral obligation. European Journal of Philosophy, 6, 335–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, J. (2009). The publicity of reasons. Philosophical Perspectives, 23, 471–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vitaly Kiryushchenko.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kiryushchenko, V. Korsgaard’s Moral Theory ln the Light of Kant’s Architectonics. Philosophia 50, 1931–1944 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-020-00317-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-020-00317-z

Keywords

Navigation