Moritz Hildt
{"title":"Kants Hedonismus","authors":"Moritz Hildt","doi":"10.7203/rek.5.2.15538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Immanuel Kant famously rejected hedonism. It is, however, much less known that Kant himself – despite his rejection of hedonism in moral matters – puts forward a hedonistic theory when he talks about human happiness. While this essay is primarily concerned with a discussion of what I shall call Kant’s „prudential hedonism“, my findings are also systematically relevant, in at least two ways: Firstly, Kant’s argumentative strategy – dismissing hedonism with regard to morality, while endorsing it with regard to human happiness– suggests that hedonism as a philosophical approach deserves a nuanced treatment. Secondly, Kant’s own hedonism suggests that this approach might have a considerably higher systematic potential as hedonism is frequently granted in contemporary debates. In this essay, I will start by sketching Kant’s prudential hedonism. Then, I will discuss three difficulties my reading encounters – the indeterminacy of pleasure, the possibility of something like a „theory“ of well-being in Kantian terms, and the problem of a deficit in autonomy –, before returning to the two systematic implications of my interpretation in the conclusion.","PeriodicalId":153284,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Estudios Kantianos","volume":"202 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Estudios Kantianos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7203/rek.5.2.15538","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

伊曼努尔·康德以拒绝享乐主义而闻名。然而,很少有人知道康德本人——尽管他在道德问题上拒绝享乐主义——在谈到人类幸福时提出了一种享乐主义理论。虽然这篇文章主要是关于我称之为康德的“审慎享乐主义”的讨论,但我的发现至少在两个方面也是系统相关的:首先,康德的论证策略——在道德方面摒弃享乐主义,而在人类幸福方面赞同享乐主义——表明享乐主义作为一种哲学方法值得细致入微的对待。其次,康德自己的享乐主义表明,这种方法可能具有相当高的系统潜力,因为享乐主义在当代辩论中经常被认可。在这篇文章中,我将首先概述康德的审慎享乐主义。然后,我将讨论我在阅读中遇到的三个困难——快乐的不确定性,康德术语中幸福的“理论”的可能性,以及自主性缺陷的问题——然后再回到我在结论中解释的两个系统含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Kants Hedonismus
Immanuel Kant famously rejected hedonism. It is, however, much less known that Kant himself – despite his rejection of hedonism in moral matters – puts forward a hedonistic theory when he talks about human happiness. While this essay is primarily concerned with a discussion of what I shall call Kant’s „prudential hedonism“, my findings are also systematically relevant, in at least two ways: Firstly, Kant’s argumentative strategy – dismissing hedonism with regard to morality, while endorsing it with regard to human happiness– suggests that hedonism as a philosophical approach deserves a nuanced treatment. Secondly, Kant’s own hedonism suggests that this approach might have a considerably higher systematic potential as hedonism is frequently granted in contemporary debates. In this essay, I will start by sketching Kant’s prudential hedonism. Then, I will discuss three difficulties my reading encounters – the indeterminacy of pleasure, the possibility of something like a „theory“ of well-being in Kantian terms, and the problem of a deficit in autonomy –, before returning to the two systematic implications of my interpretation in the conclusion.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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