This critical survey of recent work on Kant's doctrine of the fact of reason and his doctrine of the practical postulates (of freedom, God, and immortality) assesses the implications of these doctrines for the debate about realism and antirealism in Kant's moral philosophy. Section 1 briefly surveys some salient considerations from the first Critique and Groundwork. In section 2, I argue that recent work on the role, content, "factual" nature, and epistemic status of the fact of reason does not support (...) an anti-realist interpretation of Kant's ethics. In section 3, I argue that recent work on the derivation and epistemic and ontological status of the practical postulates does not support an anti-realist interpretation of Kant's ethics. (shrink)

Kant identifies the “highest moral-physical good” as that combination of “good living” and “true humanity” which best harmonises in a “good meal in good company”. Why does Kant privilege the dinner party in this way? By examining Kant’s accounts of enlightenment, cosmopolitanism, love and respect, and gratitude and friendship, the answer to this question becomes clear. Kant’s moral ideal is that of an enlightened and just cosmopolitan human being who feels and acts with respect and love for all persons and (...) such an ideal is temporarily manifested in the sort of social interaction achievable at a good dinner party. (shrink)

The role of affection in the mass production of information and the post-truth phenomenon has returned a bias to the analysis of emotions, under which they appear as a key agent in disinformation systems, or as a distorting element that must be eliminated in order to have an "objective" access to the truth through the strict use of reason. In this work we will defend that both positions incur in problematic approaches, and that both are based on premises that deserve (...) a review. From this critical exercise, we will suggest a transversal proposal of minimums from which to carry out the analysis of emotions in the study of post-truth. (shrink)

Il progetto antropologico di un mondo-ambiente nel quale l'uomo, grazie allo sviluppo delle proprie capacità, trova la sua posizione e conquista un ruolo centrale, si inserisce, in Kant, all'interno in un disegno più ampio che pone l'uomo al cospetto di scopi la cui realizzazione va ben al di là di quel che egli può fare; va ben al di là dell'immagine pragmatica di un mondo pensato e progettato a misura d'uomo. Come risulta insufficiente, dunque, ogni antropologia fisiologica che rimanga limitata (...) al punto di vista dell'uomo in quanto prodotto del gioco della natura, altrettanto insufficiente risulterebbe un'antropologia pragmatica che si legasse unicamente alla rappresentazione antropocentrica di un mondo pensato a misura dell'arbitrio e del potere umano. (shrink)

Resumen Es muy conocida la opinión de Kant en relación con la inmoralidad del suicidio. De ahí que, muchos autores lo consideren como un prohibicionista absoluto. Sin embargo, no hay hasta el momento un análisis puntual sobre la definición metafísica-conceptual del suicidio en la teoría kantiana. En este artículo propongo entender el suicidio en Kant como una muerte física, total, autorreferencial, voluntaria e inmoral. Esta definición contrastará con la privación de la vida, la cual no implica inmoralidad. Al ser voluntarios, (...) tanto la privación de la vida, como el suicidio son actos racionales y entendibles a partir de las máximas de acción. La inmoralidad del suicidio sólo surgirá al considerar la primacía de las razones morales por encima de razones no morales.It is common knowledge theposition of Kant regarding the immorality of suicide. Several authors attribute him an absolutist-forbidden criterion. Nerveless, there is no extended analysis about the metaphysical-conceptual definition of suicide in Kantian theory. In this paper I hold that suicide in Kant can be defined asphysical death, full, self-referential, voluntary, and immoral. This definition conflicts with the definition of deprivation of life which is not immoral. As voluntarily acts, both suicide and deprivation of life are rational acts that can be understood as maxims of action. The immorality property of suicide is due to the primacy of moral over non-moral reasons. (shrink)