首页> 外文学位 >Connecting agency and morality in Kant's moral theory.
【24h】

Connecting agency and morality in Kant's moral theory.

机译:康德道德理论中的代理与道德联系起来。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

One of the defining features of a Kantian theory of morality is its account of how to answer the question, "Why be moral?" For Kant, we should be moral not out of sympathy or self-interest, but because it is a requirement of reason. Morality is built into our rational nature just as surely as the principle of non-contradiction and modus ponens, and we ought to be moral for the same reason that we ought to follow these other laws of rationality---we understand them to be correct. Moreover, like these laws of logic, the moral law has a special constitutive status. Rational knowers are subject to modus ponens in virtue of being a rational knower, and similarly, the Kantian argues, rational agents are subject to the moral law in virtue of being a rational agent.; Unfortunately, many of the recent attempts to reconstruct Kant's argument that morality is constitutive of rationality have tried to connect morality analytically with the idea of rational agency. In my first chapter, I show why this kind of analytic argument from rationality to morality will not work and why we should not attribute it to Kant. In later chapters, I try to provide a reconstruction of a genuinely synthetic argument. First, I try to make plausible the claim that practical consciousness of the form of rational agency brings along with it categorical restraints, by drawing an extensive analogy with theoretical reason. Next, I attempt to defend Kant's claim that any categorical restraint will lead to the Categorical Imperative. This will amount to proving that all external reasons are agent-neutral. I turn next to a close reading of Groundwork III in which I argue lies the key to Kant's synthetic account. In the Groundwork, Kant argues that a rational agent who becomes practically self-conscious of the form of her rationality must admit her own freedom and thereby is subject to the moral law. I close with considerations on what it means to justify a categorical requirement, and why this justification should satisfy the criteria of knowledge even of the first Critique.
机译:康德式道德理论的定义特征之一是其对如何回答“为什么要道德?”这一问题的解释。对于康德来说,我们应该在道德上不是出于同情或出于个人利益,而是因为这是理性的要求。道德与无矛盾原则和惯用原则一样,必定会建立在我们的理性本质中;出于与我们遵循其他理性定律相同的原因,我们应该具有道德性,我们理解它们是正确的。而且,像这些逻辑定律一样,道德法具有特殊的构成地位。康德认为,理性的知识者由于是理性的知识者而受到惯用的语气;同样,康德认为,理性的行为者也由于作为理性的行为者而受到道德法的约束。不幸的是,最近许多重建康德关于道德是理性构成的论点的尝试都试图将道德与理性代理的思想进行分析联系。在我的第一章中,我展示了为什么从理性到道德的这种分析论据行不通,为什么我们不应该将其归因于康德。在后面的章节中,我尝试对真正的综合论证进行重构。首先,我试图通过与理论理性的广泛类比,使理性代理形式的实践意识伴随其绝对约束的主张变得合理。接下来,我试图捍卫康德的主张,即任何绝对限制都会导致绝对命令。这将等于证明所有外部原因均与代理无关。我接下来仔细阅读《地面工作III》,我认为这是康德综合报告的关键。康德在《基础工作》中认为,理性主体实际上要意识到自己的理性形式就必须承认自己的自由,从而服从道德律。我最后考虑了证明类别要求合理化的含义,以及为什么这种合理化应满足即使是第一个批判的知识标准。

著录项

  • 作者

    Schwartz, Jeremy.;

  • 作者单位

    The University of Chicago.;

  • 授予单位 The University of Chicago.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2007
  • 页码 231 p.
  • 总页数 231
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 哲学理论;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号