从克尔凯郭尔的存在主义哲学看康德伦理观

IF 0.7 Q4 ETHICS
José García Martín, Arturo Morales Rojas, Roman Králik
{"title":"从克尔凯郭尔的存在主义哲学看康德伦理观","authors":"José García Martín, Arturo Morales Rojas, Roman Králik","doi":"10.2478/ebce-2021-0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article compares two groundings of ethics: the ethical postulates of Immanuel Kant with the existential thinking of S. Kierkegaard. To achieve this goal, first, it proposes highlighting the fundamental ideas of Kantian ethics; then, secondly, highlighting Kierkegaard’s ethical stance; and finally, contrasting both approaches to identify differences and similarities. Conclusively, we can say that the pure Kantian ethical formality of duty for duty’s sake necessarily dispenses with existential and concrete content; it is an ethics that is grounded in itself, that refers to itself, to the rational nature of the human being and its universality. In contrast, Kierkegaardian ethics is a Christian ethics, it is the ethics of love for one’s neighbour and, above all, for God; it is a relational and existential ethics of the single individual.","PeriodicalId":53173,"journal":{"name":"Ethics and Bioethics (in Central Europe)","volume":"54 1","pages":"48 - 57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Kantian ethical perspective seen from the existential philosophy of Søren Kierkegaard’s Victor Eremita\",\"authors\":\"José García Martín, Arturo Morales Rojas, Roman Králik\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/ebce-2021-0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article compares two groundings of ethics: the ethical postulates of Immanuel Kant with the existential thinking of S. Kierkegaard. To achieve this goal, first, it proposes highlighting the fundamental ideas of Kantian ethics; then, secondly, highlighting Kierkegaard’s ethical stance; and finally, contrasting both approaches to identify differences and similarities. Conclusively, we can say that the pure Kantian ethical formality of duty for duty’s sake necessarily dispenses with existential and concrete content; it is an ethics that is grounded in itself, that refers to itself, to the rational nature of the human being and its universality. In contrast, Kierkegaardian ethics is a Christian ethics, it is the ethics of love for one’s neighbour and, above all, for God; it is a relational and existential ethics of the single individual.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics and Bioethics (in Central Europe)\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"48 - 57\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics and Bioethics (in Central Europe)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/ebce-2021-0003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics and Bioethics (in Central Europe)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/ebce-2021-0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

摘要本文比较了两种伦理学基础:康德的伦理假设与克尔凯郭尔的存在主义思想。要实现这一目标,首先要突出康德伦理学的基本思想;其次,突出克尔凯郭尔的伦理立场;最后,对比两种方法来识别异同。最后,我们可以说,纯粹康德的“为义务而义务”的伦理形式,必然摈弃了存在的和具体的内容;它是一种以自身为基础的伦理学,它指向自身,指向人类的理性本质及其普遍性。相反,克尔凯郭尔的伦理学是一种基督教伦理学,它是爱邻居的伦理学,尤其是爱上帝的伦理学;它是一个个体的关系和存在的伦理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Kantian ethical perspective seen from the existential philosophy of Søren Kierkegaard’s Victor Eremita
Abstract This article compares two groundings of ethics: the ethical postulates of Immanuel Kant with the existential thinking of S. Kierkegaard. To achieve this goal, first, it proposes highlighting the fundamental ideas of Kantian ethics; then, secondly, highlighting Kierkegaard’s ethical stance; and finally, contrasting both approaches to identify differences and similarities. Conclusively, we can say that the pure Kantian ethical formality of duty for duty’s sake necessarily dispenses with existential and concrete content; it is an ethics that is grounded in itself, that refers to itself, to the rational nature of the human being and its universality. In contrast, Kierkegaardian ethics is a Christian ethics, it is the ethics of love for one’s neighbour and, above all, for God; it is a relational and existential ethics of the single individual.
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
Ethics and Bioethics (in Central Europe)
Ethics and Bioethics (in Central Europe) Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
28.60%
发文量
10
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe) is one of the leading Central European international journals in ethics and bioethics focusing on philosophical ethics, bioethics and applied ethics also including the history of ethics, ethical and moral education as well as professional ethics. The journal publishes theoretical articles as well as empirical findings concerning all aspects of ethics and morality. Authors can submit research articles, review articles, book reviews, conference reports and information on recently published books. Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe) is published in print as well as electronic format, two issues per year (June and December). Only articles in English are accepted for publishing.
×
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