Kant and Compliance With Conventionalized Injustice

Southern Journal of Philosophy 32 (2):135-159 (1994)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Kant's Categorical Imperative reveals the injustice of excepting ourselves from conventional social practices like promise keeping. But can it equally reveal the injustice of complying with societally entrenched unjust maxims, e.g., slave-holding maxims in colonial America? Standard Kantian arguments against slavery depend on overly narrow definitions of slavery and an implausible requirement that we universalization across all rational beings. This essay reconstructs the CI-procedure so that it can detect and explain the wrongness of conventionalized injustice. In particular, maxim universalization must thus be combined with discounting socialization and coercion that produce nonrational compliance with a cooperative scheme.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,440

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The concept of injustice.Eric Heinze - 2013 - New York,: Routledge.
A Critique of Hermeneutical Injustice.Laura Beeby - 2011 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 111 (3pt3):479-486.
Argumentative Injustice.Patrick Bondy - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (3):263-278.
Plato on Injustice in Republic Book I.Yuji Kurihara - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 2:133-139.
Two Concepts of Epistemic Injustice.David Coady - 2010 - Episteme 7 (2):101-113.
Epistemic Injustice and Epistemic Trust.Gloria Origgi - 2012 - Social Epistemology 26 (2):221-235.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-14

Downloads
82 (#201,630)

6 months
18 (#136,573)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Cheshire Calhoun
Arizona State University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references