The ‘black box’ in Stoic axiology refers to the mysterious connection between the input of Stoic deliberation (reasons generated by the value of indifferents) and the output (appropriate actions). In this paper, I peer into the black box by drawing an analogy between Stoic and Kantian axiology. The value and disvalue of indifferents is intrinsic, but conditional. An extrinsic condition on the value of a token indifferent is that one's selection of that indifferent is sanctioned by context-relative ethical principles. The (...) value of an indifferent that does not meet this condition is normatively silenced, such that it fails to constitute a reason for action. (shrink)

In Political Liberalism, J. Rawls describes a meta-ethical procedure — political constructivism — whereby political theorists formulate political principles by assembling and reworking ideas from the public political culture. To many of his moral realist and moral constructivist critics, Rawls's procedure is simply a recent version of the “popular moral philosophy” that Kant excoriates in the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. I defend the idea of political constructivism on philosophical and political grounds. I argue that political constructivism is the (...) best available methodology for self-legislating, socially embedded and fallible human beings; then I show that political constructivism may produce principles that could garner the principled assent of Euro-American Muslims such as Taha Jabir Al-Alwani. The article considers how political constructivism might be employed to formulate new political principles for Euro-American societies experiencing and confronting the Islamic revival. [R]. (shrink)

SummaryOn Kant's view, the moral individual cannot be “programmed” by sociological or educational techniques. To brainwash is to destroy freedom while to educate is to develop the capacity for freedom. Plato's proposal to invent mythic roots as incentives to moral conduct is not acceptable, since it involves not merely the propagation of falsehoods, but its success requires also a totalitarian state that destroys freedom. Not being concerned with mere legality, but with encouraging true morality, he has renounced forcing moral goodness.Marx, (...) Lenin, Stalin and Mao all proposed educational programs that put down the mythic roots of their secular religions. They project and indoctrinate into people's mind a new vision of society and man. The diabolical religion of National Socialism was inculcated by terror and totalitarianism.Kant's ethics has it mythic roots, too, which lie in Christian pietism. But his fully developed theory proscribes the use of any mythic religion not based on morality. (shrink)

O sumo bem, tal qual apresentado na CRPr, consiste na união da moralidade com a felicidade. Como esta ligação não pode ser assegurada necessariamente pelo próprio homem durante a sua finita e imperfeita existência, resta que se existe uma síntese; a mesma apenas pode ser elucidada em um suposto juízo sintético a priori que possa unir a vida terrena virtuosa com a felicidade post mortem que é o que parece exigir uma síntese desta natureza. Frente a esta questão, defendemos que (...) há boas razões para sustentar que o sumo bem é um objeto necessário da razão prática pura com base no pressuposto metafísico da constituição peculiar da faculdade de apetição de seres racionais finitos sem comprometer, com isso, o caráter de universalidade desta pretensão. O artigo culmina apontando alguns pontos de vista de aproximação da figura do sumo bem deixando claro que não há uma prova cabal; mas a fecundidade de um conjunto de perspectivas teóricas e práticas que permitem uma série de aproximações desse conceito até o ponto em que, por razões bem fundamentadas, não parece mais razoável sustentá-lo apenas como um ideal meramente dialético. (shrink)

O sumo bem, tal qual apresentado na CRPr, consiste na união da moralidade com a felicidade. Como esta ligação não pode ser assegurada necessariamente pelo próprio homem durante a sua finita e imperfeita existência, resta que se existe uma síntese; a mesma apenas pode ser elucidada em um suposto juízo sintético a priori que possa unir a vida terrena virtuosa com a felicidade post mortem que é o que parece exigir uma síntese desta natureza. Frente a esta questão, defendemos que (...) há boas razões para sustentar que o sumo bem é um objeto necessário da razão prática pura com base no pressuposto metafísico da constituição peculiar da faculdade de apetição de seres racionais finitos sem comprometer, com isso, o caráter de universalidade desta pretensão. O artigo culmina apontando alguns pontos de vista de aproximação da figura do sumo bem deixando claro que não há uma prova cabal; mas a fecundidade de um conjunto de perspectivas teóricas e práticas que permitem uma série de aproximações desse conceito até o ponto em que, por razões bem fundamentadas, não parece mais razoável sustentá-lo apenas como um ideal meramente dialético. (shrink)

A stable classification of practical principles into mutually exclusive types is foundational to Kant’s moral theory. Yet, other than a few brief hints on the distinction between maxims and laws, he does not provide any elaborate discussion on the classification and the types of practical principles in his works. This has led Onora O’Neill and Lewis Beck to reinterpret Kant’s classification of practical principles in a way that would clarify the conceptual connection between maxims and laws. In this paper I (...) argue that the revised interpretations of O’Neill and Beck stem from a mistaken reading of the fundamental basis of the classification of practical principles. To show this, I first argue that Kant distinguishes between maxims and laws on the bases of validity and reality. I then argue that although a practical principle necessarily has the feature of validity, its reality in actually moving the agents to action sufficiently makes a principle a practical principle. If this is so, I argue that the classification of practical principles must be based on the extent to which they are effective in human agents. Such a classification yields us three exhaustive and mutually exclusive types namely, “maxims that are not potential laws”, “maxims that are potential laws” and “laws that are not maxims”. (shrink)

Abstract: This essay examines two interpretations of Kant's argument for the formula of humanity. Christine M. Korsgaard defends a constructivist reading of Kant's argument, maintaining that humans must view themselves as having absolute value because their power for rational choice confers value on their ends. Allen Wood, however, defends a realist interpretation of Kant's argument, maintaining that humans actually are absolutely valuable and that their choices do not confer value but rather reflect their understanding of how the objects of their (...) choices fulfill their needs and wants and contribute to their flourishing. Though Korsgaard's reading is more consistent with Kant's prioritizing of the right over the good, this essay raises a metaethical question regarding her constructivist position, namely, “What is meant by her claim that rational choice ‘confers’ value on objects?” In developing this question, it presents a realist account of goodness that is taken from Peter Geach's “Good and Evil.”. (shrink)