Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Kant's Racism as a Philosophical Problem.Laurenz Ramsauer - 2023 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 104 (4):791-815.
    Immanuel Kant was possibly both the most influential racist and the most influential moral philosopher of modern, Western thought. So far, authors have either interpreted Kant as an “inconsistent egalitarian” or as a “consistent inegalitarian.” On the former view, Kant failed to draw the necessary conclusions about persons from his own moral philosophy; on the latter view, Kant did not consider non‐White people as persons at all. However, both standard interpretations face significant textual difficulties; instead, I argue that Kant's moral (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • How to Use Someone ‘Merely as a Means’.Pauline Kleingeld - 2020 - Kantian Review 25 (3):389-414.
    The prohibition on using others ‘merely as means’ is one of the best-known and most influential elements of Immanuel Kant’s moral theory. But it is widely regarded as impossible to specify with precision the conditions under which this prohibition is violated. On the basis of a re-examination of Kant’s texts, the article develops a novel account of the conditions for using someone ‘merely as a means’. It is argued that this account has not only strong textual support but also significant (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • Never Merely as a Means: Rethinking the Role and Relevance of Consent.Melissa Seymour Fahmy - 2023 - Kantian Review 28 (1):41-62.
    For several decades, Kant scholars, inspired by the Groundwork false-promising example, have constructed consent-based criteria for using another merely as a means. Unfortunately, these consent-based accounts produce assessments that are both counter-intuitive and un-Kantian in relatively simple cases. This article investigates why these consent-based accounts fail and offers an alternative. The Groundwork false-promising example has encouraged a problematically narrow understanding of the conditions for using another merely as a means in virtue of the fact that the example involves a consent-sensitive (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A critique of mutualism’s combination of the Aristotelian and Kantian traditions.Francisco Javier Lopez Frías - 2018 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 45 (2):161-176.
    ABSTRACTIn this article, I will identify two key normative principles at the core of Robert L. Simon’s mutualist theory of sport, namely, the respect-for-the-opponent principle and the idea that sport is a practice aimed at pursuing excellence. The former is a Kantian principle grounded in human beings’ rationality, and the latter is an Aristotelian principle related to the development of excellences as a means to human flourishing. After having presented and analyzed both principles, I will critically evaluate Simon’s attempt to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations