Forgiveness and Moral Development.

Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel) Pub Date : 2016-01-01 Epub Date: 2016-07-05 DOI:10.1007/s11406-016-9727-6
Paula Satne
{"title":"Forgiveness and Moral Development.","authors":"Paula Satne","doi":"10.1007/s11406-016-9727-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Forgiveness is clearly an important aspect of our moral lives, yet surprisingly Kant, one of the most important authors in the history of Western ethics, seems to have very little to say about it. Some authors explain this omission by noting that forgiveness sits uncomfortably in Kant's moral thought: forgiveness seems to have an ineluctably 'elective' aspect which makes it to a certain extent arbitrary; thus it stands in tension with Kant's claim that agents are autonomous beings, capable of determining their own moral status through rational reflection and choice. Other authors recognise that forgiveness plays a role in Kant's philosophy but fail to appreciate the nature of this duty and misrepresent the Kantian argument in support of it. This paper argues that there is space in Kant's philosophy for a genuine theory of forgiveness and hopes to lay the grounds for a correct interpretation of this theory. I argue that from a Kantian perspective, forgiveness is not 'elective' but, at least in some cases, morally required. I claim that, for Kant, we have an imperfect duty of virtue to forgive repentant wrongdoers that have embarked on a project of self-reflection and self-reform. I develop a novel argument in support of this duty by drawing on Kant's theory of rational agency, the thesis of radical evil, Kant's theory of moral development, and the formula of humanity. However, it must be noted that this is a conditional duty and Kant's position also entails that absence of repentance on the part of the wrongdoer should be taken as evidence of a lack of commitment to a project of self-reflection and self-reform. In such cases, Kant claims, we have a perfect duty to ourselves not to forgive unrepentant wrongdoers. I argue that this duty should be understood as one of the duties of <i>self-esteem</i>, which involves the duty to respect and recognise our own dignity as rational beings.</p>","PeriodicalId":74436,"journal":{"name":"Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel)","volume":"44 4","pages":"1029-1055"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11406-016-9727-6","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-016-9727-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/7/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Forgiveness is clearly an important aspect of our moral lives, yet surprisingly Kant, one of the most important authors in the history of Western ethics, seems to have very little to say about it. Some authors explain this omission by noting that forgiveness sits uncomfortably in Kant's moral thought: forgiveness seems to have an ineluctably 'elective' aspect which makes it to a certain extent arbitrary; thus it stands in tension with Kant's claim that agents are autonomous beings, capable of determining their own moral status through rational reflection and choice. Other authors recognise that forgiveness plays a role in Kant's philosophy but fail to appreciate the nature of this duty and misrepresent the Kantian argument in support of it. This paper argues that there is space in Kant's philosophy for a genuine theory of forgiveness and hopes to lay the grounds for a correct interpretation of this theory. I argue that from a Kantian perspective, forgiveness is not 'elective' but, at least in some cases, morally required. I claim that, for Kant, we have an imperfect duty of virtue to forgive repentant wrongdoers that have embarked on a project of self-reflection and self-reform. I develop a novel argument in support of this duty by drawing on Kant's theory of rational agency, the thesis of radical evil, Kant's theory of moral development, and the formula of humanity. However, it must be noted that this is a conditional duty and Kant's position also entails that absence of repentance on the part of the wrongdoer should be taken as evidence of a lack of commitment to a project of self-reflection and self-reform. In such cases, Kant claims, we have a perfect duty to ourselves not to forgive unrepentant wrongdoers. I argue that this duty should be understood as one of the duties of self-esteem, which involves the duty to respect and recognise our own dignity as rational beings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宽恕与道德发展。
宽恕显然是我们道德生活的一个重要方面,但令人惊讶的是,作为西方伦理学史上最重要的作家之一,康德似乎对此几乎没有什么看法。一些作者通过指出宽恕在康德的道德思想中令人不安地存在来解释这一遗漏:宽恕似乎具有不可避免的“选择性”方面,这使得它在一定程度上是任意的;因此,它与康德的主张相悖,康德主张行为人是自主的存在,能够通过理性的反思和选择来决定自己的道德地位。其他作者认识到宽恕在康德的哲学中扮演着重要角色,但却未能理解这种责任的本质,并歪曲了康德支持宽恕的论点。本文认为康德哲学中存在着一种真正意义上的宽恕理论的空间,并希望为这一理论的正确解读奠定基础。我认为,从康德的角度来看,宽恕不是“可选择的”,而是,至少在某些情况下,道德要求。我认为,对康德来说,我们有一种不完美的美德义务去原谅那些已经开始自我反思和自我改造的悔过者。我通过引用康德的理性能动性理论、激进恶论、康德的道德发展理论和人性公式,提出了一个新的论点来支持这一义务。然而,必须指出的是,这是一种有条件的义务,康德的立场也意味着,犯错的一方缺乏忏悔,应该被视为缺乏自我反思和自我改革的承诺的证据。康德认为,在这种情况下,我们对自己有完全的责任,不去原谅不悔改的作恶者。我认为,这种义务应该被理解为自尊的义务之一,自尊包括尊重和承认我们作为理性人的尊严的义务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
How AI Systems Can Be Blameworthy. W. Matthews Grant's Dual Sources Account and Ultimate Responsibility. Taxation in the COVID-19 Pandemic: to Pay or Not to Pay. The Value of Knowledge and Other Epistemic Standings: A Case for Epistemic Pluralism. The Conditional Analysis of the Agentive Modals: a Reply to Mandelkern et al.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1