Kant’s Formula of the Universal Law of Nature Reconsidered: A Critique of the Practical Interpretation

I criticize the widely accepted “practical” interpretation of the universality test contained in Kant’s first formula of the categorical imperative in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals – the formula of the universal law of nature. I argue that this interpretation does not work for contradi...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Rivera-Castro, Faviola (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Published: 2014
In: Journal of moral philosophy
Year: 2014, Volume: 11, Issue: 2, Pages: 185-208
Further subjects:B Categorical Imperative
B Universalization in Ethics
B Kantian Ethics
B Kant
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002c 4500
001 1817470566
003 DE-627
005 20241205202827.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220927s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1163/17455243-4681018  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1817470566 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1817470566 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Rivera-Castro, Faviola  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Kant’s Formula of the Universal Law of Nature Reconsidered: A Critique of the Practical Interpretation 
264 1 |c 2014 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a I criticize the widely accepted “practical” interpretation of the universality test contained in Kant’s first formula of the categorical imperative in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals – the formula of the universal law of nature. I argue that this interpretation does not work for contradictions in conception because it wrongly takes contradictions in the will as the model for them and, as a consequence, cannot establish a clear distinction between the two kinds of contradiction. This interpretation also assumes an understanding of universality that departs from Kant’s own and, cannot, for this reason, capture the kind of contradiction that he explicitly claims to establish. I provide an alternative interpretation, which I call revised logical interpretation, that allows us to account for contradictions in conception, including those examples that the practical interpretation cannot handle, as well as to establish a clear distinction between the two kinds of contradiction. 
601 |a Université 
601 |a Interpretation 
650 4 |a Universalization in Ethics 
650 4 |a Categorical Imperative 
650 4 |a Kantian Ethics 
650 4 |a Kant 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of moral philosophy  |d Leiden : Brill, 2004  |g 11(2014), 2, Seite 185-208  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)474382281  |w (DE-600)2169771-1  |w (DE-576)273875329  |x 1745-5243  |7 nnas 
773 1 8 |g volume:11  |g year:2014  |g number:2  |g pages:185-208 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1163/17455243-4681018  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext  |7 1 
856 4 0 |u https://brill.com/view/journals/jmp/11/2/article-p185_3.xml  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext  |7 1 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4192063565 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1817470566 
LOK |0 005 20220927052955 
LOK |0 008 220927||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-09-22#7F2197EEFAC73BB994AAEC5477FC5AA7222C365E 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
LOK |0 939   |a 27-09-22  |b l01 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw