Abstract

In Reason and Morality Alan Gewirth tries to show that every moral agent is logically committed to the acceptance of certain moral rules. The reasoning that underlies this thesis is first analysed and further on criticized. In this critique especially Gewirth's attempt to derive moral from prudential claims is attacked. Such a derivation, it is argued, would require an additional premise that incorporates the very essence of morality, namely its motivational character. By way of conclusion, Gewirth's staging of the come-back of the categorical imperative is put in a broader historical and philosophical context. More specifically, the suggestion is made that, though Gewirth's theory is a reaction against the prevailing noncognitivist theories, both his theory and the theories he criticizes share a similar concept of ethical rationality