“The Fact of Reason”: The Axiomatic Model in Kant’s Moral Philosophy

IF 0.2 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Kristoffer Willert
{"title":"“The Fact of Reason”: The Axiomatic Model in Kant’s Moral Philosophy","authors":"Kristoffer Willert","doi":"10.1353/rvm.2023.a906813","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: In the epicenter of his attempt to justify the “objective validity” of morality and freedom in the Critique of Practical Reason , Kant introduces a so-called fact of reason, which is rendered as the fact that human beings are consciou s of the moral ought’s categorical authority. However, few parts of Kant’s thinking have bemused commentators as much as this. In this article, the author explores a set of intersecting problems related to the fact of reason: (1) the problem of its general argumentative role in Kant’s practical philosophy, (2) the problem of the fact as a brute fact . He argues that both problems can be understood and resolved only if we regard Kant’s introduction of the fact of reason as an implicit attempt to articulate intrinsic problems with reductive explanations of morality. His main claim, which has been surprisingly absent in most interpretations of Kant’s fact of reason, will be that the fact of reason functions as an undeniable yet improvable fact (similar to mathematical principles) from which other practical truths (such as the objective reality of freedom) can be derived. As Kant says unambiguously in the Jäsche-Logic : the “reality” of the moral law “is an axiom.”","PeriodicalId":46225,"journal":{"name":"REVIEW OF METAPHYSICS","volume":"160 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"REVIEW OF METAPHYSICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/rvm.2023.a906813","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: In the epicenter of his attempt to justify the “objective validity” of morality and freedom in the Critique of Practical Reason , Kant introduces a so-called fact of reason, which is rendered as the fact that human beings are consciou s of the moral ought’s categorical authority. However, few parts of Kant’s thinking have bemused commentators as much as this. In this article, the author explores a set of intersecting problems related to the fact of reason: (1) the problem of its general argumentative role in Kant’s practical philosophy, (2) the problem of the fact as a brute fact . He argues that both problems can be understood and resolved only if we regard Kant’s introduction of the fact of reason as an implicit attempt to articulate intrinsic problems with reductive explanations of morality. His main claim, which has been surprisingly absent in most interpretations of Kant’s fact of reason, will be that the fact of reason functions as an undeniable yet improvable fact (similar to mathematical principles) from which other practical truths (such as the objective reality of freedom) can be derived. As Kant says unambiguously in the Jäsche-Logic : the “reality” of the moral law “is an axiom.”
“理性的事实”:康德道德哲学的公理化模式
摘要:在《实践理性批判》中,康德试图证明道德和自由的“客观有效性”,其核心是引入了一个所谓的理性事实,即人类意识到道德应当的绝对权威。然而,康德的思想中很少有部分像这一点一样让评论家们感到困惑。在本文中,作者探讨了一系列与理性事实相关的交叉问题:(1)理性事实在康德实践哲学中的一般论证作用问题;(2)理性事实作为一种残酷事实的问题。他认为,只有当我们把康德对理性事实的引入视为一种含蓄的尝试,即通过对道德的简化解释来阐明内在问题时,这两个问题才能被理解和解决。他的主要主张是,理性的事实作为一种不可否认的但可改进的事实(类似于数学原理)发挥作用,其他实践真理(如自由的客观现实)可以从中推导出来。令人惊讶的是,这一主张在大多数对康德理性事实的解释中都没有出现。正如康德在Jäsche-Logic中明确指出的那样:道德律的“实在性”“是一个公理”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
REVIEW OF METAPHYSICS
REVIEW OF METAPHYSICS PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
33.30%
发文量
3
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信