Adrian Moore’s paper continues the development of a radical re-interpretation of Kant’s practical philosophy initiated by his Noble in Reason, Infinite in Faculty. [Moore, 2003] I have discussed elsewhere why it seems to me that Moore’s work, taken as a composite with that of his co-symposiasts today Philip Stratton-Lake and Burt Louden, adds up to a comprehensive and radical re-assessment of the contemporary significance of Kant’s practical philosophy which moral philosophers generally ought not to ignore. [Thomas, 2004] Moore states that he is engaged in today’s paper “in a rational reconstruction of Kant …. sufficiently Kantian to be at least worth taking seriously. But I shall certainly part company with Kant at various points.” [Moore, 2005 p. 1] I shall, similarly, not be evaluating Moore’s arguments in terms of their fidelity to Kant; that would not be be the most fruitful way to engage with his project. It is better evaluated as a free-standing meta- 2 ethical position that draws on Kant and as a position that seems to me one of the most interesting on offer in contemporary meta-ethics. Moore’s overall strategy has three separable components. First, he accepts that there is no such thing as pure practical reason, as that very idea would violate the internal reasons constraint. [Williams, 1981, 1995a, 2001] Second, he makes a concession, which softens the impact of this first admission, to the effect that concept possession in the context of a given social practice has a range of normative commitments including practical commitments. Third, Moore emphasises the continuity between the practical orientation of living by concepts and the general project of making rational sense. It is this latter idea, in particular, that leads his general arguments in his book length study into Kant’s religious as well as his moral writings. On the first point, Moore is simply prepared to work with the idea that a general contrast between “reasons” and “motives” is not helpful..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Noble in Reason, Infinite in Faculty: Themes and Variations in Kant's Moral and Religious Philosophy.A. W. Moore - 2003 - Routledge.
G.E. Moore's Ethical Theory: Resistance and Reconciliation.Brian Hutchinson - 2001 - Cambridge University Press.
Review: Moore, Noble in Reason, Infinite in Faculty: Themes and Variation in Kant's Moral and Religious Philosophy. [REVIEW]Andrew Chignell - 2006 - Philosophical Review 115 (1):118-121.
Is Moore a Metaphysical Ethicist?Sibel Oktar - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 10:317-323.
The Purpose of Analysis in Moore's Principia Ethica.Eivind Storheim - 1966 - Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 9 (1-4):156 – 170.
Scanlon Versus Moore on Goodness.Philip Stratton-Lake & Brad Hooker - 2006 - In Terry Horgan & Mark Timmons (eds.), Metaethics After Moore. Oxford University Press. pp. 149.
Maxims in Kant's Practical Philosophy.Richard R. McCarty - 2006 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 44 (1):65-83.
From Thick to Thin: Two Moral Reduction Plans.Daniel Y. Elstein & Thomas Hurka - 2009 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 39 (4):pp. 515-535.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads36 ( #143,640 of 2,172,022 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #173,295 of 2,172,022 )
How can I increase my downloads?