Abstract
Many philosophers believe that a moral theory, given all the relevant facts, should be able to determine what is morally right and wrong. It is commonly argued that Aristotle’s ethical theory suffers from a fatal flaw: it places responsibility for determining right and wrong with the virtuous agent who has phronesis rather than with the theory itself. It is also commonly argued that Immanuel Kant’s ethical theory does provide a concept of right that is capable of determining right and wrong in specific cases. I argue, however, that Kant never gives a determinate moral theory of right. Rather, I argue that Kant’s moral theory is similar in many ways to that of Aristotle, in that it still holds that a moral agent with phronesis, rather than the theory, determines what is right. Kant’s practical philosophy was not so much meant to tell us right and wrong as to prevent bad moral theory from corrupting our moral common sense, and it is our moral common sense that determines right and wrong naturally.
Keywords Catholic Tradition  Contemporary Philosophy  History of Philosophy
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0019-0365
DOI ipq201252219
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,979
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

JAK PRZEKONAĆ KANTA DO KŁAMSTWA? APORIE IMPERATYWU KATEGORYCZNEGO.Michał Piekarz - 2015 - Hybris, Revista de Filosofí­A (30):[113-131.
Empirical Psychology, Common Sense, and Kant’s Empirical Markers for Moral Responsibility.Patrick Frierson - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 39 (4):473-482.
Emotion in Kant's Moral Theory.James Robert Heichelbech - 1996 - Dissertation, University of Colorado at Boulder
Kant's Theory of Moral Agency.Michael Patrick Hughes - 2002 - Dissertation, State University of New York at Stony Brook
Kant and the Possibility of Moral Motivation.Mark Timmons - 1985 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 23 (3):377-398.
The Impossibility of Supererogation in Kant’s Moral Theory.Daniel Guevara - 1999 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (3):593-624.
Moral Theory: An Introduction.Mark Timmons - 2001 - Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Kant: Critique of Practical Reason.Mary J. Gregor (ed.) - 1997 - Cambridge University Press.
Phronesis, Poetics, and Moral Creativity.John Wall - 2003 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 6 (3):317-341.
Kant: Critique of Practical Reason.Mary J. Gregor (ed.) - 1997 - Cambridge University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-04-04

Total views
52 ( #217,854 of 2,504,849 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #417,030 of 2,504,849 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes