康德不否认由此产生的道德运气

IF 0.5 0 PHILOSOPHY Midwest Studies in Philosophy Pub Date : 2019-07-09 DOI:10.1111/MISP.12109
R. J. Hartman
{"title":"康德不否认由此产生的道德运气","authors":"R. J. Hartman","doi":"10.1111/MISP.12109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: It is almost unanimously accepted that Kant denies resultant moral luck— that is, he denies that the lucky consequence of a person’s action can affect how much praise or blame she deserves. Philosophers often point to the famous good will passage at the beginning of the Groundwork to justify this claim. I argue, however, that this passage does not support Kant’s denial of resultant moral luck. Subsequently, I argue that Kant allows agents to be morally responsible for certain kinds of lucky consequences. Even so, I argue that it is unclear whether Kant ultimately endorses resultant moral luck. The reason is that Kant does not write enough on moral responsibility for consequences to determine definitively whether he thinks that the lucky consequence for which an agent is morally responsible can add to her degree of praiseworthiness or blameworthiness. The clear upshot, however, is that Kant does not deny resultant moral luck.","PeriodicalId":39586,"journal":{"name":"Midwest Studies in Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/MISP.12109","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kant Does Not Deny Resultant Moral Luck\",\"authors\":\"R. J. Hartman\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/MISP.12109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract: It is almost unanimously accepted that Kant denies resultant moral luck— that is, he denies that the lucky consequence of a person’s action can affect how much praise or blame she deserves. Philosophers often point to the famous good will passage at the beginning of the Groundwork to justify this claim. I argue, however, that this passage does not support Kant’s denial of resultant moral luck. Subsequently, I argue that Kant allows agents to be morally responsible for certain kinds of lucky consequences. Even so, I argue that it is unclear whether Kant ultimately endorses resultant moral luck. The reason is that Kant does not write enough on moral responsibility for consequences to determine definitively whether he thinks that the lucky consequence for which an agent is morally responsible can add to her degree of praiseworthiness or blameworthiness. The clear upshot, however, is that Kant does not deny resultant moral luck.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39586,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Midwest Studies in Philosophy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/MISP.12109\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Midwest Studies in Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/MISP.12109\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Midwest Studies in Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/MISP.12109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

摘要:人们几乎一致认为,康德否认由此产生的道德幸运——也就是说,他否认一个人的行为的幸运结果会影响她应该得到多少赞扬或指责。哲学家们经常引用《奠基之作》开头著名的善意段落来证明这一说法。然而,我认为,这段话并不支持康德对由此产生的道德运气的否认。随后,我认为康德允许代理人对某些幸运的后果承担道德责任。即便如此,我认为尚不清楚康德最终是否赞同由此产生的道德运气。原因是康德没有写足够的关于后果的道德责任的文章来确定他是否认为代理人在道德上负有责任的幸运后果会增加她的可赞扬程度或可指责程度。然而,显而易见的结果是,康德并不否认由此产生的道德运气。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Kant Does Not Deny Resultant Moral Luck
Abstract: It is almost unanimously accepted that Kant denies resultant moral luck— that is, he denies that the lucky consequence of a person’s action can affect how much praise or blame she deserves. Philosophers often point to the famous good will passage at the beginning of the Groundwork to justify this claim. I argue, however, that this passage does not support Kant’s denial of resultant moral luck. Subsequently, I argue that Kant allows agents to be morally responsible for certain kinds of lucky consequences. Even so, I argue that it is unclear whether Kant ultimately endorses resultant moral luck. The reason is that Kant does not write enough on moral responsibility for consequences to determine definitively whether he thinks that the lucky consequence for which an agent is morally responsible can add to her degree of praiseworthiness or blameworthiness. The clear upshot, however, is that Kant does not deny resultant moral luck.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Midwest Studies in Philosophy
Midwest Studies in Philosophy Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Midwest Studies in Philosophy presents important thinking on a single topic in philosophy with each volume. Influential contributors bring provocative and varying ideas to the theme at hand. Recent volumes of Midwest Studies in Philosophy include Truth and its Deformities, Philosophy and the Empirical, Shared Intentions and Collective Responsibility, and Free Will and Moral Responsibility.
期刊最新文献
Pessimism about the Future in advance Ill-Being for Subjectivists in advance Subjective Theories of Ill-Being in advance Subjectivists Should Say: Pain Is Bad because of How It Feels in advance Pain, Depression, and Goal-Fulfillment Theories of Ill-Being in advance
×
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