An introductory guide to the seminal work of Kant and his modern moral philosophy.

Reinholds Briefe uber die Kantische Philosophie gehoren zu den wirkungsmachtigsten Produkten seines umfangreichen Schaffens. Von den Zeitgenossen teils mit grosser Begeisterung aufgenommen, tragen sie wesentlich zur Etablierung der ersten Kant-Bewegung bei. Durch ihr Bestreben, die Vernunftkritik als Theorie der moralisch-religiosen Erneuerung zu prasentieren, gelten sie als die brisanteste unter den damaligen philosophischen Neuerscheinungen. Sie sind wegweisend fur einen Kantianismus, der sich im Laufe der 1790er Jahre als eine die politischen Umwalzungen in Frankreich flankierende Geistesrevolution begreift. Der neu herausgegebene Band enthalt (...) zwolf Briefe, welche die auffallendsten Resultate von Kants Vernunftkritik ausgehend von den dringendsten wissenschaftlichen und moralischen Bedurfnissen unserer Zeit darstellen. Der Adressat erfahrt, dass mit Kants Erkenntniskritik und moralischer Neubegrundung der speziellen Metaphysik ein taugliches Mittel zur Bewaltigung gegenwartiger Grundlagenkrisen im Gebiete von Moral, Naturrecht, Theologie und Asthetik bereitsteht. Mit Nachdruck wird das problemlosende Potential von Kants moraltheologischen Resultaten hervorgehoben. In Kants Vernunftglauben und Statuierung eines moralischen Erkenntnisgrundes fur das Dasein Gottes und die Unsterblichkeit der Seele sieht Reinhold die besten Voraussetzungen fur die Beendigung einer Reihe aufklarungshemmender Debatten. Im Visier steht allem voran der als Pantheismusstreit beruhmt gewordene Disput zwischen Mendelssohn und Jacobi, in dessen Einflussbereich ein wenig ergiebiger Kampf zwischen Naturalisten und Supernaturalisten dominant werden sollte. Die Darstellung geschichtlicher Kontexte zur Idee der Unsterblichkeit der Seele und die eingehende Auseinandersetzung mit den antiken Seelenlehren kulminieren in der These, durch Kants Kritik und Neufundierung der rationalen Psychologie konne auch der bisherige, Antike und Neuzeit durchziehende Gegensatz zwischen Spiritualisten und Materialisten als aufgelost gelten. Wiederholt wird zu Reflexionen uber die Geschichte der Menschheit angesetzt, die deutlich machen, dass Reinhold das Geschichtsbild der Illuminaten mehr und mehr in Anlehnung an Lessings Idee einer kommenden Menschheitsepoche des dritten Evangeliums sowie an Kants Vision eines weltburgerlichen Endzustandes vortragt. Die Neuedition ist mit einer ausfuhrlichen Einleitung und einem Kommentar versehen. In diesen Teilen wird unter anderem auf die Entstehungsgeschichte der Briefe, auf Reinholds Kant-Rezeption sowie auf sein Kant-Verstandnis, das mit der damals gangigen Ansicht uber den Alleszermalmer kontrastiert, eingegangen. Vermerkt werden zudem inhaltlich relevante Abweichungen von fruheren Fassungen der in den Band von 1790 eingeflossenen Textteile. (shrink)

Orthodoxy says that the thesis that composition is identity (CAI) entails universalism: the claim that any collection of entities has a sum. If this is true it counts in favour of CAI, since a thesis about the nature of composition that settles the otherwise intractable special composition question (SCQ) is desirable. But I argue that it is false: CAI is compatible with the many forms of restricted composition, and SCQ is no easier to answer given CAI than otherwise. Furthermore, in (...) seeing why this is the case we reveal an objection to CAI: that it allows for the facts concerning what there is to be settled whilst leaving open the question about what is identical to what. (shrink)

This book explores the main stages and key concepts in the development of Kant's critical philosophy, from the early 1760s to the 1790s. Karl Ameriks provides a detailed and concise account of the main ways in which the later critical works provide a plausible defense of the conception of humanity's fundamental end that Kant turned to after reading Rousseau in the 1760s. Separate essays are devoted to each of the three Critiques, as well as to earlier notes and lectures and (...) several of Kant's later writings on history and religion. A final section devotes three chapters to post-Kantian developments in German Romanticism, accounts of tragedy up through Nietzsche, and contemporary philosophy. The theme of an elliptical path is shown to be relevant to these writers as well as to many aspects of Kant's own life and work. The topics of the book include fundamental issues in epistemology and metaphysics, with a new defense of the Amerik's 'moderate' interpretation of transcendental idealism. (shrink)

In the Critique of Practical Reason, Kant presents the moral law as the sole ‘fact of pure reason’ that neither needs nor admits of a deduction to establish its authority. This claim may come as a surprise to many readers of his earlier Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. In the last section of the Groundwork, Kant seemed to offer a sketch of just such a ‘deduction of the supreme principle of morality’ . Although notoriously obscure, this sketch shows that (...) Kant hoped to base the moral law in the freedom that rational agents can claim as members of the ‘intelligible world’ that transcendental idealism makes available to us. In contrast, the second Critique abandons all aspirations of deriving morality from more basic notions of freedom and practical rationality. (shrink)

In his critical writings before 1786 Kant argues that trans¬cendental freedom is a problem for speculative philosophy – and that this problem was solved satisfyingly in 1781 by his own Transcendental Idealism. In the Groundwork, 1785, after having linked the moral law inseparably to transcendental freedom by his discovery of autonomy, Kant claimed that the moral law can be deduced from freedom thus established. But in May 1786 he was persuaded by a review-article that his 1781/85-deduction of freedom was incompatible (...) with his critical philosophy. Hence Kant had to shift the epistemic priority from freedom to the moral law. He thus replaced the deduction of freedom and morality given in the Third Part of the Groundwork by his Doctrine of the “fact of pure practical reason” in the 2nd Critique. By this move Kant established an entirely new and dominant role for practical reason in metaphysics, a role which already shows up in the second edition of the 1st Critique – and which leads to Kant′s unprecedented conception of a “praktisch-dogmatische Metaphyik” in the 1790ties. (shrink)

When this work was first published in 1960, it immediately filled a void in Kantian scholarship.

Henry E. Allison presents a comprehensive commentary on Kant's Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. Allison pays special attention to the structure of the work and its historical and intellectual context. He argues that, despite its relative brevity, the Groundwork is the single most important work in modern moral philosophy.

This book follows hard upon Korsgaard's The Sources of Normativity. Both present the author's influential version of a Kantian theory of normative ethics and metaethics. Whereas The Sources of Normativity was a systematic investigation of "normativity" written as a single unit, the present volume is a collection of previously published papers, some of them already well known and much discussed, dating between 1983 and 1993. By the nature of the case, one might expect less thematic unity in this book than (...) in the other one, but the present book is a deeper and more wide ranging presentation of the author's views. Korsgaard's historical focus in The Sources of Normativity is less on Kant and more on the British moralists. Creating the Kingdom of Ends deals quite explicitly with the interpretation of Kant's moral philosophy. The papers in this book contain, in my judgment, the heart of Korsgaard's work: a variety of fresh and illuminating insights into Kant's moral theory and its relation to contemporary ethical theory which have helped to reshape the image of Kant's ethics and to refocus the issues dealt with in current moral philosophy. Or to make claims less grand but of more immediate relevance to this review, there is no question that some of the papers in this book have helped to reshape both the present writer's image of Kant's ethics and his conception of the way questions of ethical theory should be addressed. I hope below to say something both about where I think Korsgaard has gotten these matters right, and where I find her position either unclear or dubious. (shrink)

This article examines Kant′s use of the expression “fact of reason” by giving an analysis of the pseudo-mathematical method which Kant employs in the first part of the Critique of Practical Reason. It turns out that Kant′s use of this expression has nothing to do with appealing to a certain fact as being an obvious, self-evident truth. There is no need for such an appeal since the “Fundamental Law of Pure Practical Reason” is a “practical postulate” which, like a postulate (...) in geometry, is unquestionably certain. In order to realize its validity it is sufficient to know what a practical law is and on what its validity depends. The fundamental law of pure practical reason needs, in Kant′s view, a “deduction” since it is a synthetic principle a priori. But its deduction cannot be a proof since postulates neither can nor need be proved. It has to be a justification which guarantees that the use of pure reason in giving practical laws is not “transcendent”, but “immanent”. This justification has, unlike Kant′s deduction of the “Postulates of Empirical Thinking”, the systematic form of a “defence” which invalidates possible objections by showing that they themselves necessarily rest on a transcendent use of reason. (shrink)

This paper offers a new interpretation of Kant's relationship with skepticism in the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. My position differs from commonly held views in the literature in two ways. On the one hand, I argue that Kant's relationship with skepticism is active and systematic (contrary to Hill, Wood, Rawls, Timmermann, and Allison). On the other hand, I argue that the kind of skepticism Kant is interested in does not speak to the philosophical tradition in any straightforward sense (...) (contrary to Forster and Guyer). On my reading, Kant takes up a skeptical method in the Groundwork as a way of exposing certain obstacles in our ordinary and philosophical thinking about morality. The central obstacle he is interested in is practical in character, arising from a natural tendency we have to rationalize against the moral law. In attempting to resolve this tendency, I argue, the Groundwork turns out to have a profoundly educative task. (shrink)

“What do you see when you look at your face in the mirror?” asks J. David Velleman in introducing his philosophical theory of action. He takes this simple act of self-scrutiny as a model for the reflective reasoning of rational agents: our efforts to understand our existence and conduct are aided by our efforts to make it intelligible. Reflective reasoning, Velleman argues, constitutes practical reasoning. By applying this conception, _Practical Reflection_ develops philosophical accounts of intention, free will, and the foundation (...) of morals. This new edition of _Practical Reflection_ contains the original 1989 text along with a new introduction and is the latest entry in The David Hume Series of Philosophy and Cognitive Science Reissues, which keeps in print previously published indispensable works in the area of cognitive science. _ _ _ _. (shrink)

“What do you see when you look at your face in the mirror?” asks J. David Velleman in introducing his philosophical theory of action. He takes this simple act of self-scrutiny as a model for the reflective reasoning of rational agents: our efforts to understand our existence and conduct are aided by our efforts to make it intelligible. Reflective reasoning, Velleman argues, constitutes practical reasoning. By applying this conception, _Practical Reflection_ develops philosophical accounts of intention, free will, and the foundation (...) of morals. This new edition of _Practical Reflection_ contains the original 1989 text along with a new introduction and is the latest entry in The David Hume Series of Philosophy and Cognitive Science Reissues, which keeps in print previously published indispensable works in the area of cognitive science. _ _ _ _. (shrink)

The paper gives an interpretation of Kant's doctrine of the fact of reason against the background of a constructivist reading of his philosophy, which does not allow us to appeal to any indubitable facts. The fact of reason is the object of a philosophical account of the moral law forms the quid juris part of deduction or legitimization of the law. A more intuitive grasp of the fact is the phenomenon of reverence for duty which ordinary people grasp in form (...) of a feeling and emotion. (shrink)

Kant’s views on the relation between freedom and moral law seem to undergo a major, unannounced shift. In the third section of the Groundwork, Kant seems to be using the fact that we must act under the idea of freedom as a foundation for the moral law. However, in the Critique of Practical Reason, Kant claims that our awareness of our freedom depends on our awareness of the moral law. I argue that the apparent conflict between the two texts depends (...) on a reading of the opening paragraphs of Groundwork III, and on an interpretation of Kant’s claim that we “act under the idea of freedom”, that is implausible on textual and on philosophical grounds. I then present an alternative interpretation of what Kant means by “acting under the idea of freedom” and of the opening paragraphs of Groundwork III. I argue that the only substantive conclusion of these paragraphs is that no theoretical proof of freedom is necessary. Moreover I argue that although these paragraphs raise concerns about the validity of the moral law, these concerns and Kant’s answers to them, do not give rise to any significant conflict with his views in the Critique of Practical Reason. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie Jahrgang: 97 Heft: 3 Seiten: 358-387.

In his pre-critical lectures on rational psychology, Kant employs an argument from the I to the transcendental freedom of the soul. In the (A-edition of the) first Critique, he distances himself from rational psychology, and instead offers four paralogisms of this doctrine, insisting that ‘I think’ no longer licenses any inferences about a soul. Kant also comes alive to the possibility that we could be thinking mechanisms – rational beings, but not agents. These developments rob him of his pre-critical rationalist (...) argument for freedom. In the Groundwork, this is a serious problem; if we are not free, morality will be a phantasm for us. In Groundwork III, Kant attempts to overcome this by offering a new argument for our freedom, involving the standpoint of practical reason. In this paper, I detail these developments and present a practical and phenomenological reading of Kant’s approach in Groundwork III. I also venture a defence of this new argument. (shrink)

This chapter examines Kant's moral philosophy, which is developed principally in three major works: the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, the Critique of Practical Reason, and The Metaphysics of Morals. It begins with an overview of Kant's foundational theory, and then turns, more briefly, to his normative theory.

Two centuries after they were published, Kant's ethical writings are as much admired and imitated as they have ever been, yet serious and long-standing accusations of internal incoherence remain unresolved. Onora O'Neill traces the alleged incoherences to attempts to assimilate Kant's ethical writings to modern conceptions of rationality, action and rights. When the temptation to assimilate is resisted, a strikingly different and more cohesive account of reason and morality emerges. Kant offers a "constructivist" vindication of reason and a moral vision (...) in which obligations are prior to rights and in which justice and virtue are linked. O'Neill begins by reconsidering Kant's conceptions of philosophical method, reason, freedom, autonomy and action. She then moves on to the more familiar terrain of interpretation of the Categorical Imperative, while in the last section she emphasizes differences between Kant's ethics and recent "Kantian" ethics, including the work of John Rawls and other contemporary liberal political philosophers. (shrink)

Just as there are rational requirements on thought, there are rational requirements on action. This book defends a conception of ethics, and a related conception of human nature, according to which altruism is included among the basic rational requirements on desire and action. Altruism itself depends on the recognition of the reality of other persons, and on the equivalent capacity to regard oneself as merely one individual among many.

A famous passage in the first Critique (A 557 f.) often gives rise to the belief that Kant had not yet delivered a full treatment of freedom in 1781 and intended to shift this treatment to future writings. However, a closer inspection of the passage reveals that, to the contrary, Kant claims that due to the limitations of human reason his critical account of freedom given thus far must be considered complete. And indeed, this account reappears unchanged in the Groundwork. (...) When considered in this light, not only do the exact achievements of the first Critique concerning Kant’s doctrine of freedom become evident, but so too does the further development of this doctrine. In 1785, the Groundwork supplies a new conceptual link between freedom and the moral law (and with it an explanation of the possibility of categorical imperatives). And thanks to this very link, Kant is able, in the second Critique (1787/88), to remedy a ‘dogmatic’ mistake (discovered by a reviewer in 1786) in his 1781/85 account of freedom. (shrink)