玉米棒子
发表于 2025-3-25 04:40:53
Brooks Atkinson,Robert G. Loweryargument of this essay is completed. But in this final chapter I want to consider two issues which have arisen several times and which, suitably construed, constitute fundamental objections to Kant’s practical philosophy as a whole. The first issue is the relationship between happiness and morality,
亲属
发表于 2025-3-25 09:59:22
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4345-2Immanuel Kant; Kant; freedom; liberty; truth
exigent
发表于 2025-3-25 14:32:49
978-94-010-8431-4Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht 1986
关心
发表于 2025-3-25 18:25:04
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3100/309971/309971_24.png
大漩涡
发表于 2025-3-25 23:05:43
Nijhoff International Philosophy Serieshttp://image.papertrans.cn/e/image/309971.jpg
debble
发表于 2025-3-26 03:18:44
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3100/309971/309971_26.png
咽下
发表于 2025-3-26 06:13:52
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3100/309971/309971_27.png
Hemodialysis
发表于 2025-3-26 09:50:28
Maxims,, for example, in the principle of the universality of nature (PUN). “Act as if the maxim of your action wereito become through your will a universal law of nature” (Gr. 421). This is the chief (and perhaps the sole) principle which Kant actually uses for judging the Tightness of actions, that is, f
使出神
发表于 2025-3-26 13:22:13
Universality and the categorical imperative,t to play in moral theory. Does it, for example, merely state what moral obligation or duty is?. Is it, in other words, merely a conceptual formula of the moral “ought” (in contrast to nonmoral “oughts”)? Or does the categorical imperative (perhaps in addition to the former role) inform us of which
mortgage
发表于 2025-3-26 18:19:24
Ends and moral obligation, to have genuine moral goodness, i.e., if agents of those actions are to act from duty and thereby exercise a good will. This means, in terms of maxims, that an action is morally good only if the agent’s incentival maxim is that of conscientious adherence to the demand of morality for its own sake.