Kantian Constructivism and the Normativity of Practical Identities

被引:3
作者
Brown, Etienne [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Montreal, Ctr Rech Eth CRE, Montreal, PQ, Canada
关键词
neo-Aristotelianism; Kantian constructivism; practical identities; practical reasons; moral obligations; transcendental arguments;
D O I
10.1017/S0012217318000240
中图分类号
B [哲学、宗教];
学科分类号
01 ; 0101 ;
摘要
Many neo-Aristotelians argue that practical identities are normative, that is, they provide us with reasons for action and create binding obligations. Kantian constructivists agree with this insight but argue that contemporary Aristotelians fail to fully justify it. Practical identities are normative, Kantian constructivists contend, but their normativity necessarily derives from the normativity of humanity. In this paper, I shed light on this underexplored similarity between neo-Aristotelian and Kantian constructivist accounts of the normativity of practical identities, and argue that both ultimately fail. I end by suggesting an alternative justification of the claim that practical identities are normative.
引用
收藏
页码:571 / 590
页数:20
相关论文
共 20 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1998, Critique of Pure Reason
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1996, PRACTICAL PHILOS
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2008, Chap. 7 in the Constitution of Agency
  • [4] [Anonymous], 1957, INTENTION
  • [5] Cohen G.A., 1996, SOURCES NORMATIVITY, P167
  • [6] Crisp R., 2004, Nicomachean Ethics
  • [7] Descombes Vincent, 1994, PHILOS JUDGEMENT
  • [8] Finnis John, 1980, Natural Law and Natural Rights
  • [9] Foot Philippa., 2001, NATURAL GOODNESS
  • [10] Griffin J., 1986, APPL PSYCHOL-HLTH WE