After MacIntyre: Kierkegaard, Kant, and classical virtue

In his influential book After Virtue, Alasdair MacIntyre identifies Kierkegaard's view of ethics with that of Kant. Both Kant and Kierkegaard, according to MacIntyre, accept the modern paradigm of moral activity for which freedom of the will is the ultimate basis. Ronald M. Green, in Kierkegaar...

全面介紹

Saved in:  
書目詳細資料
主要作者: Humbert, David (Author)
格式: Electronic/Print Article
語言:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
載入...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
出版: Wiley [2014]
In: Journal of religious ethics
Year: 2014, 卷: 42, 發布: 2, Pages: 310-333
Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains:B Kierkegaard, Søren 1813-1855 / MacIntyre, Alasdair C. 1929-, After virtue / 康德主義 / 倫理學
IxTheo Classification:AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism
NCA Ethics
NCB Personal ethics
VA Philosophy
在線閱讀: Volltext (doi)
實物特徵
總結:In his influential book After Virtue, Alasdair MacIntyre identifies Kierkegaard's view of ethics with that of Kant. Both Kant and Kierkegaard, according to MacIntyre, accept the modern paradigm of moral activity for which freedom of the will is the ultimate basis. Ronald M. Green, in Kierkegaard and Kant: The Hidden Debt, accepts and deepens this alignment between the two thinkers. Green argues that Kierkegaard deliberately obscured his debt to Kant by a systematic “misattribution” of his ideas to other thinkers, and to classical philosophy in particular. This essay argues that MacIntyre and Green are mistaken in identifying Kierkegaard with the Kantian tradition of moral autonomy and that they overlook his debt to the classical conception of virtue. In casting Kierkegaard in the role of the quintessential exponent of a modern conception of freedom, they have perhaps overlooked one of the greatest critics of moral autonomy who has ever lived.
ISSN:0384-9694
Contains:Enthalten in: Journal of religious ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1111/jore.12058