Rationalizing: Kant on Moral Self-Deception

Q2 Arts and Humanities SATS Pub Date : 2021-08-25 DOI:10.1515/sats-2020-0011
J. Noller
{"title":"Rationalizing: Kant on Moral Self-Deception","authors":"J. Noller","doi":"10.1515/sats-2020-0011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Kant’s moral philosophy is challenged by the so-called “Socratic Paradox”: If free will and pure practical reason are to be identified, as Kant argues, then there seems to be no room for immoral actions that are to be imputed to our individual freedom. The paper argues that Kant’s conception of rationalizing (“Vernünfteln”) helps us to avoid the Socratic Paradox, and to understand how immoral actions can be imputed to our individual freedom and responsibility. In rationalizing, we misuse our capacity of reason in order to construct the illusion according to which we are not bound to the absolute demand of the moral law, but rather subject to exceptions and excuses. Finally, the paper interprets the three rules of “common sense” (sensus communis) in Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment in terms of an antidote to rationalizing.","PeriodicalId":38824,"journal":{"name":"SATS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SATS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/sats-2020-0011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Kant’s moral philosophy is challenged by the so-called “Socratic Paradox”: If free will and pure practical reason are to be identified, as Kant argues, then there seems to be no room for immoral actions that are to be imputed to our individual freedom. The paper argues that Kant’s conception of rationalizing (“Vernünfteln”) helps us to avoid the Socratic Paradox, and to understand how immoral actions can be imputed to our individual freedom and responsibility. In rationalizing, we misuse our capacity of reason in order to construct the illusion according to which we are not bound to the absolute demand of the moral law, but rather subject to exceptions and excuses. Finally, the paper interprets the three rules of “common sense” (sensus communis) in Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment in terms of an antidote to rationalizing.
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
理性化:康德论道德自欺
康德的道德哲学受到所谓的“苏格拉底悖论”的挑战:如果自由意志和纯粹的实践理性是一致的,正如康德所主张的那样,那么似乎就没有余地将不道德的行为归咎于我们的个人自由。本文认为,康德的理性化概念(“vern nfteln”)有助于我们避免苏格拉底悖论,并理解不道德的行为如何归咎于我们的个人自由和责任。在理性化的过程中,我们误用了我们的理性能力来构建一种幻觉,根据这种幻觉,我们不受道德法则的绝对要求的约束,而是受例外和借口的约束。最后,本文对康德《判断力批判》中“常识”(sensus communis)的三条规则,从理性化的解毒剂的角度进行了解读。
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
SATS
SATS Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Do Logical Aliens Think? Frege’s Agent-Relative View of Logic’s Constitutive Role for Thinking Between Virtuous Trust and Distrust: A Model of Political Ideologies in Times of Challenged Political Parties Scientific Testability Following the Assumption of Insufficient Knowledge and Resources Journalists Gaining Trust Through Silencing of the Self Frontmatter
×
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