Kant's Argument for the Formula of the End in Itself

Idealistic Studies 47 (3):171-189 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

One approach to Kant’s argument for the Formula of the End in Itself takes Kant to ground FEI as a possible categorical imperative with a regressive argument that rests on a non-moral conception of rational nature. This paper presents a new, logical pluralism version of this approach. In conjunction with three other steps of argument, the logical pluralism version of the regressive argument grounds FEI by showing that an agent is rationally required to adopt a self-affirming plural standpoint, and thus to take it to have absolute worth. A logical pluralism version of the regressive argument thereby avoids three objectionable claims relied on by other versions: that a rational agent must take their end to be objectively good; that if an agent values their own rational nature, then they must also value others’ rational nature; and that any source of value must itself be of unconditional value.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,881

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

How to argue for the value of humanity.Adrienne M. Martin - 2006 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (1):96-125.
Kant's Universal Law Formula Revisited.Sven Nyholm - 2015 - Metaphilosophy 46 (2):280-299.
Good, Evil, and the Necessity of an Act.Sebastian Rödl - 2018 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21 (1):91-102.
Kant's formula of the end in itself: Some recent debates.Lara Denis - 2007 - Philosophy Compass 2 (2):244–257.
Kant and the perfect duty to others not to lie.James Edwin Mahon - 2006 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 14 (4):653 – 685.
On the Universal Law and Humanity Formulas.Sven R. Nyholm - 2012 - Dissertation, University of Michigan
Willing Universal Law vs. Universally Lawful Willing.Scott Forschler - 2010 - Southwest Philosophy Review 26 (1):141-152.
On Korsgaard’s argument for Kant’s moral law.Amir Saemi - 2021 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 64 (8):773-787.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-12-29

Downloads
26 (#610,935)

6 months
5 (#639,460)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references