Kant’s Virtue Ethics*

Louden, Robert B.

doi:10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199768714.003.0001

Cited by 7 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Plausibly, Kant does not intend us to test every maxim of action, though he does intend us to test some. This is the view taken by Louden , but for a different view, to which Louden's paper is a reply, see O'Neill .…”

mentioning

confidence: 87%

“…For an early defence of Kant against the objection, see Herman 1993a; for a pithy clarification of the issue, see Korsgaard : xiii, fn. 6, and Louden : 487–8. I agree with Bielefeldt : 449, that Wood overstates the reply to the objection when he claims that for Kant, ‘philanthropic love is an indispensable ground of morality ’ (: 39; italics in original).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is sometimes complained that Kant's moral philosophy suffers for lack of a role for character of the second kind. See, for example, the references to MacIntyre and Foot in Louden : 473–4. But we might side with O'Neill in thinking that the point should rather go the other way; that virtue theories which give a role to character of the second kind need to be corrected by the Kantian (and indeed the Aristotelian) emphasis on practical reason.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Kant's Commitment to Metaphysics of Morals

Theunissen

2013

European J of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A definitive feature of Kant's moral philosophy is its rationalism. Kant insists that moral theory, at least at its foundation, cannot take account of empirical facts about human beings and their circumstances in the world. This is the core of Kant's commitment to 'metaphysics of morals', and it is what he sees as his greatest contribution to moral philosophy. The paper clarifies what it means to be committed to metaphysics of morals, why Kant is committed to it, and where he thinks empirical considerations may enter moral theory. The paper examines recent work of contemporary Kantians (Barbara Herman, Allen Wood, and Christine Korsgaard) who argue that there is a central role for empirical considerations in Kant's moral theory. Either these theorists interpret Kant himself as permitting empirical considerations to enter, or they propose to extend Kant's theory so as to allow them to enter. With some qualifications, I argue that these interpretive trends are not supported by the texts, and that the proposed extensions are not plausibly Kantian. Kant's insistence on the exclusion of empirical considerations from the foundations of moral theory is not an incidental feature of his thought which might be modified while the rest remains unchanged. Rather, it is the very centre of his endeavours in moral philosophy. If we disagree with it, I argue, we have grounds for moving to a distinctly different theoretical framework.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 87%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Kant's Commitment to Metaphysics of Morals

Theunissen

2013

European J of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically, it seems to me that following a virtue ethics approach does a better job of handling our intuitions about manners and etiquette. I realize that Kant does discuss the virtues, and there have been efforts, some of them quite thoughtful, to reconcile Kantianism and Aristotelianism (see O'Neill 1989, Sherman 1997, Louden 1997, and Korsgaard 1998 among others). However, I have never been satisfied that these accounts do justice to the fundamental intuitions that lead one to be an Aristotelian or a Kantian.…”

Section: Stohr Writesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Principles, Virtues, or Detachment? Some Appreciative Reflections on Karen Stohr’s On Manners

Norden

2016

Dao

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On Manners is a delightful book. It is, most importantly, philosophically interesting, original, and insightful. In addition, Prof. Stohr has achieved something that I aspire to, but generally fail to realize: she skillfully integrates learned references to classic texts (including the writings of Plato, Aristotle, 1 Thanks to Prof. Stohr for writing her book and for thoughtfully engaging with a non-Western philosophical perspective, to Prof. Erin Cline for organizing a panel on Prof. Stohr's book, to Prof. Yong Huang for allowing us to publish the essays resulting from the panel in Dao, and to two anonymous referees whose comments greatly improved my essay. Kant, Hume, Jane Austen, and Edith Wharton) with pop culture references (including Seinfeld, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Miss Manners, and Martha Stewart). She does all this with a writing style that is clear, elegant, and often quite pithy. Many phrases from this book could become aphorisms. Another aphorist, Ashleigh Brilliant, once quipped, "Philosophers never agree on anything. That is the one thing on which all philosophers agree." This is not quite true. I found myself agreeing with a great many things that Prof. Stohr said. However, admiration for a work of philosophy is best expressed in thoughtful critique, rather than in panegyric. The fundamental claim of Prof. Stohr's book is that ...rules of polite behavior are justified by their basis in commonly held moral principles and ideals, and...they play an essential role in enabling us to act on those principles and ideals. Social conventions...serve as vehicles through which we express important moral values like respect and consideration for the needs, ideas, and opinions of others. (Stohr, 2012: 3-4) Another way she puts this point is through the distinction between "manners" and "etiquette"： ...the principles of manners are moral principles, and specific rules of etiquette get their authority from their relationship to those moral principles. ...

show abstract

“…Lange Zeit war die philosophische Auseinandersetzung mit Kants Ethikbis auf wenige Ausnahmen (etwa Diemer 1940;Schmucker 1961;Gregor 1963;Lehmann 1980;O'Neill 1996;Louden 1986)fast ausschließlich auf die sog. Grundlegungsschriften, die "Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten" (GMS) und die "Kritik der praktischen Vernunft" (KpV), konzentriert.…”

unclassified

Kants Tugendlehre

Esser

2020

Handbuch Tugend Und Tugendethik

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kants Tugendlehre bildet den Abschluss seiner Ethik. In den "Metaphysischen Anfangsgründen der Tugendlehre" (1797) wird diese Lehre systematisch entwickelt. Die weitaus berühmteren, sogenannten Grundlegungsschriftendie "Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten" (1785) und die "Kritik der praktischen Vernunft" (1788)bereiten diese Pflichtenlehre lediglich vor. Während die Grundlegungsschriften mit dem "Kategorischen Imperativ" ein allgemeines und verbindliches moralisches Gesetz für den gesamten Bereich der Praxis und für alle vernünftigen Wesen begründen, nennt die Tugendlehre inhaltlich bestimmte Pflichten und konkrete Maximen, denen menschliche Wesen in ihrem Handeln folgen sollen. Unter Tugend in einem generellen Sinne versteht Kant die grundsätzliche Bereitschaft, dem moralischen Gesetz tatsächlich zu entsprechen und dabei auch Stärke im Umgang mit Hindernissen zu beweisen. Eine Vielzahl konkreter Tugenden ergibt sich, wenn nach den Bedingungen gefragt wird, unter denen das moralische Gesetz im Rahmen der menschlichen Existenzbedingungen verwirklicht werden kann. Dies führt aber nicht in einen Katalog von Handlungsanweisungen, sondern zu inhaltlich bestimmten Handlungsgrundsätzen (Maximen), die Kant als Tugendpflichten ausweist.

show abstract

Kant’s Virtue Ethics*

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Kant's Commitment to Metaphysics of Morals

Kant's Commitment to Metaphysics of Morals

Principles, Virtues, or Detachment? Some Appreciative Reflections on Karen Stohr’s On Manners

Kants Tugendlehre

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About