Is Kant a Great Moral Philosopher

Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 87, A Centenary Celebration: Anscombe, Foot, Midgley, and Murdoch, 2019

2017

KVH: To begin this conversation in writing, I will pose a most general, yet quite critical question of our time: are ethical codes and moral conducts still a coherent subject to philosophical/scholarly consideration (and potentially pedagogical guidance); or has the postmodern liquidity (together with the mentality of irony) disposed of the grounds to provide arguments that would seem pertinent to the realities of our fragmented society? You seem to suggest that the crisis refers to the (modern type) management of morality, not the morality itself.

With fifty-four chapters charting the development of moral philosophy in the Western world, this volume examines the key thinkers and texts and their influence on the history of moral thought from the pre-Socratics to the present day. Topics including Epicureanism, humanism, Jewish and Arabic thought, perfectionism, pragmatism, idealism and intuitionism are all explored, as are figures including Aristotle, Boethius, Spinoza, Hobbes, Hume, Kant, Hegel, Mill, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre and Rawls, as well as numerous key ideas and schools of thought. Chapters are written by leading experts in the field, drawing on the latest research to offer rigorous analysis of the canonical figures and movements of this branch of philosophy. The volume provides a comprehensive yet philosophically advanced resource for students and teachers alike as they approach, and refine their understanding of, the central issues in moral thought. Read more at http://www.cambridge.org/it/academic/subjects/philosophy/history-philosophy/cambridge-history-moral-philosophy#SKuHy5AdTDKYDw3K.99

2018

It is common knowledge that we live in an era of “advanced civilization” with respect to scientific and technical progress, however, the phenomenon of barbaric violence and corruption that promote human misery makes one raise questions on the relationship between progress in history and morality. Experience shows that progress in history does not correspond to progress in morality. But what is the reason for the disparity and how can a harmony between the two be established? The paper sees in Kant’s theory of history and moral progress plausible answer to these questions, showing that advances in civilization do not coincide with progress in morality because history has only a moral aim but not a moral end. It is therefore by developing a civil society as the proper environment for the full development of man’s rational capacities that man’s natural world could be transformed into a moral world. Where, however, the establishment of a civil society is hindered, it is the courage...

Studia z Historii Filozofii, 2020

12 Habichler supposes that in the Religionsschrift the Kantian idea of the kingdom of God (or ethical community) reaches its maturity (Alfred Habichler, Reich Gottes als Thema des Denkens bei Kant. Entwicklungsgeschichtliche und systematische Studie zur kantischen Reich-Gottes-Idee (Mainz: Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag, 1991), 224). At the same time, Habichler

History of Philosophy Quarterly, 1999

I examine the consistency of Kant's notion of moral progress as found in his philosophy of history. To many commentators, Kant's very idea of moral development has seemed inconsistent with basic tenets of his critical philosophy. This idea has seemed incompatible with his claims that the moral law is unconditionally and universally valid, that moral agency is noumenal and atemporal, and that all humans are equally free. Against these charges, I argue not only that Kant's notion of moral development is consistent, but also that the assumption of the possibility of moral progress is indispensible for Kant's moral theory.

The Palgrave Kant Handbook, 2017

Kant's moral philosophy is the part of his overall system that is most widely defended in contemporary philosophical debates, and his influence on contemporary moral philosophy is vast. The type of moral theory Kant pioneered, sometimes characterized (but not uncontroversially) as deontological or non-consequentialist, is standardly classified today as one of the major systematic approaches in normative ethicsusually alongside consequentialism (of which utilitarianism is one variant) and sometimes also alongside virtue ethics and intuitionism. It is not possible to engage very deeply with contemporary debates between defenders of these approaches, or about many other topics such as moral motivation, the nature of reasons and rationality, or the metaphysical status of moral properties and values, without encountering positions designated as Kantian. There is, however, a subtle and sometimes bewildering distinction between scholarship on Kant's moral philosophy, which aims primarily to interpret and evaluate historical texts by Kant, and positions designated as Kantian in debates among contemporary moral philosophers. It is not surprising that philosophers who find some or all of the historical Kant's moral thought defensible today would devote some of their attention to engaging with Kant's own texts and some of their attention to arguing in contemporary terms for Kantian views, perhaps with (more or less explicit) modifications to

History of European Ideas, 1985

1981

Metaphilosophy, 1999

This paper shows that moral progress is a substantive and plausible idea. Moral progress in belief involves deepening our grasp of existing moral concepts, while moral progress in practices involves realizing deepened moral understandings in behavior or social institutions. Moral insights could not be assimilated or widely disseminated if they involved devising and applying totally new moral concepts. Thus, it is argued, moral failures of past societies cannot be explained by appeal to ignorance of new moral ideas, but must be understood as resulting from refusals to subject social practices to critical scrutiny. Moral philosophy is not the main vehicle for disseminating morally progressive insights, though it has an important role in processes that lead to moral progress. Yet we have grounds for cautious optimism, since progressive moral insights can be disseminated and can, sometimes, have constructive social effects.