Kantian Constructivism and the Moral Problem

Philosophia (United States) - Tập 44 - Trang 1229-1246 - 2016
Carla Bagnoli1,2
1Department of Linguistic Studies and Cultures, University of Modena, Modena, Italy
2Department of Philosophy, Classics, History of Art and Ideas, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

Tóm tắt

According to the standard objection, Kantian constructivism implicitly commits to value realism or fails to warrant objective validity of normative propositions. This paper argues that this objection gains some force from the special case of moral obligations. The case largely rests on the assumption that the moral domain is an eminent domain of special objects. But for constructivism there is no moral domain of objects prior to and independently of reasoning. The argument attempts to make some progress in the debate by defending a robust conception of construction, which names a distinctive view of practical reasoning as transformative.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Bagnoli, C. (2011a) “Constructivism in Meta-ethics”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Winter 2011 Archive, pp. 1–51. Bagnoli, C. (2011b). Emotions and the categorical authority of moral reasons. In C. Bagnoli (Ed.), Morality and the emotions (pp. 62–81). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bagnoli, C. (2013). Constructivism about practical knowledge. In Bagnoli (Ed.), Constructivism in ethics (pp. 153–182). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bagnoli, C. (2015). Moral objectivity: a Kantian illusion? The Journal of Value Inquiry, 49, 31–45. Bagnoli, C. (2016). Kant in Metaethics: the Paradox of moral autonomy, solved by publicity. In M. Altman (Ed.), Kant Handbook (chapter 14). London: Palgrave Engstrom, S. (2002). Kant’s distinction between theoretical and practical knowledge. The Harvard Review of Philosophy, 10(1), 49–63. Engstrom, S. (2009). The form of practical knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Engstrom, Stephen (2012). Bringing practical knowledge into view: Response to Bagnoli, hill, and Reath. Analytic Philosophy 53 (1):89–97. Engstrom, S. (2013). Constructivism and practical cognitivism. In C. Bagnoli (Ed.), Constructivism in ethics (pp. 133–152). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Enoch, D. (2009). Can there be a global, interesting, coherent constructivism about practical reason? Philosophical Explorations, 12, 319–339. Fitzpatrick, W. (2013). “How not to be an ethical constructivist: A critique of Korsgaard’s Neo-Kantian constitutivism. In C. Bagnoli (Ed.), Constructivism in ethics (pp. 41–62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gibbard, A. (1999). Morality as consistency in living. Ethics, 110, 140–164. Herman, B. (1993). The practice of moral judgment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Herman, B. (2008). Training to autonomy: Kant and the question of moral education. In Moral literacy (pp. 130–154). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Hussain, N. J. Z. & Shah, N. (2006). Misunderstanding Metaethics: Korsgaard’s Rejection of Realism. In Russ Shafer-Landau (Ed.), Oxford Studies in Metaethics 1. Clarendon Press 265–94 Hussain, N., & Shah, N. (2013). Meta-ethics and its discontents: A case study of Korsgaard. In C. Bagnoli (Ed.), Constructivism in ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kant (1907). Kants gesammelte Schriften. Berlin: Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Korsgaard, C. M. (1983). Two distinctions in goodness. Philosophical Review 92 (2):169–195.reprinted in Creating the Kingdom of Ends, CUP 1996 Korsgaard, C. M. (1996). In O. O’Neill (Ed.), The sources of normativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Korsgaard, C. M. (2003). Realism and Constructivism in Twentieth-Century Moral Philosophy. Journal of Philosophical Research 28 (Supplement):99–122. reprinted in Korsgaard, Christine M. (2009). Self-Constitution: Agency, Identity, and Integrity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Korsgaard, C. M. (2008). The Constitution of Agency: Essays on Practical Reason and Moral Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press Larmore, C. (2008). The autonomy of morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. O’Neill, O. (1988). Constructivisms in ethics”. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 89, 1–22. O’Neill, O. (1989). Constructions of reason: exploration of Kant’s practical philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. O’Neill, O. (1992). Vindicating reason. In P. Guyer (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Kant (pp. 280–308). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. O’Neill, O. (1996). Toward justice and virtue. A constructive account of practical reasoning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rawls, J. (1980). Kantian constructivism in moral theory. Journal of Philosophy, 77, 515–572. Rawls, J. (2000). In B. Herman & C. M. Korsgaard (Eds.), Lectures on the history of moral philosophy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Rudder Baker, L. (2011). First-personal aspects of agency. Metaphilosophy, 42(1–2), 1–16. Scanlon, T. M. (1998). What we owe to each other. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Scanlon, T. M. (2011). How I am not a Kantian. In D. Parfit & S. Scheffler (Eds.), On what matters (pp. 116–139). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Scanlon, T. M. (2012). The appeal and limits of constructivism. In J. Lenman & Y. Shemmer (Eds.), Constructivism in practical philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Scanlon, T. M. (2014). Being realistic about reasons. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Skorupski, J. (2010). The Domain of Reasons. Oxford: Oxford University Press Smith, M. (1999). The search for the source. The Philosophical Quarterly, 49, 384–394. Stern, R. (2013). Moral skepticism, constructivism, and the value of humanity. In C. Bagnoli (Ed.), Constructivism in ethics (pp. 21–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Street, S. (2010). What is constructivism in ethics and Metaethics? Philosophy Compass, 5, 363–384. Wood, A. (2002). What is Kantian ethics (pp. 157–182). New Haven: Yale University Press.