Order:
  1. Kant’s Formula of the Universal Law of Nature Reconsidered.Faviola Rivera-Castro - 2014 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 11 (2):185-208.
    I criticize the widely accepted “practical” interpretation of the universality test contained in Kant’s first formula of the categorical imperative in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals – the formula of the universal law of nature. I argue that this interpretation does not work for contradictions in conception because it wrongly takes contradictions in the will as the model for them and, as a consequence, cannot establish a clear distinction between the two kinds of contradiction. This interpretation also assumes (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  2.  28
    Neutrality without pluralism.Faviola Rivera-Castro - 2018 - European Journal of Political Theory 20 (2).
    Friends and foes of liberal neutrality assume that neutrality presupposes pluralism. On this view, the state should be neutral among the many permissible conceptions of the individual good that citizens affirm. I argue that neutrality need not be construed as a response to pluralism. I focus on the case of specifically religious neutrality and argue that it can be an appropriate political response to what I call “the fact of religious hegemony,” which is a social scenario in which a particular (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. Kant on Virtue and Justice.Faviola Rivera-Castro - 1999 - Dissertation, Harvard University
    In this thesis I consider two common, though directly opposed, interpretations of Kantian morality. According to what I call "the other-regarding interpretation," Kantian morality is primarily about the regulation of human interaction. According to what I call "the private and internal interpretation," Kantian morality is primarily self-regarding since what chiefly matters, on this view, is adopting moral motives. I argue that both interpretations rest on a failure to understand Kant's distinction between ethics and justice , a distinction which he introduces (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark