Practical Reason and Justice : On the Moral Content Inscribed in the Principle Of Universalization

The objective of this paper is to show that the Kantian moral principle, namely the universalizability of the maxims of the will enables "accommodating" different conceptions of good life, due to the fact of it being a formal principle, without the problem of relativism. The steps that wil...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia. - Faculdade Pontifícia de Filosofia. - 75(2019), 1, Seite 537-554
1. Verfasser: CHAGAS, FLÁVIA CARVALHO (VerfasserIn)
Format: Online-Aufsatz
Sprache:English
Veröffentlicht: 2019
Zugriff auf das übergeordnete Werk:Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia
Schlagworte:Philosophy Linguistics Religion Social sciences
LEADER 01000caa a22002652 4500
001 JST125709560
003 DE-627
005 20240625092139.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 190523s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)JST125709560 
035 |a (JST)26625479 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rakwb 
041 |a eng 
100 1 |a CHAGAS, FLÁVIA CARVALHO  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Practical Reason and Justice  |b On the Moral Content Inscribed in the Principle Of Universalization 
264 1 |c 2019 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The objective of this paper is to show that the Kantian moral principle, namely the universalizability of the maxims of the will enables "accommodating" different conceptions of good life, due to the fact of it being a formal principle, without the problem of relativism. The steps that will guide the argumentation are as follows: 1) show at first that it is exactly because the Kantian moral principle consists of a formal criterion of the second order that it enables different fillings according to the individual conception of good. This position of Kant, namely that of the primacy of the just over the good, is what allows him to affirm that his moral position can be conceived a pluralistic perspective; 2) the second step may be understood as a corollary of the first in the sense that the pluralism defended by Kant has as its "enemy" skepticism, which is founded on the principle of one’s own happiness. The Kantian thesis, as we read it, is that there is not a mere logical distinction between the principles of happiness and morality, but a practical one. Such a difference in the nature of the cited principles evidences the genuinely moral or substantive character of the principle of universalization. Thus, if, on the one hand, happiness and morality constitute "open" principles in relation to the possibility of alternative fillings of its concept, the latter points to a limit for what can be thought of as content. This limit seems to be reached always in a negative path, which involves, according to Kant, a logical or practical contradiction, which leads us to the exposition of the 3) moment of this text, namely that the criterion of universalizability of the maxims of the will seems to be an indispensable tool to show us what cannot be rationally justified, since justifying that X is good/bad means that, even though the moral principle is formal, it is not empty in content insofar as it expresses the principle of justice or equity. 
540 |a © 2019 by Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 
650 4 |a Philosophy  |x Axiology  |x Ethics  |x Normative ethics  |x Morality 
650 4 |a Linguistics  |x Language  |x Vernacular language  |x Sayings  |x Maxims 
650 4 |a Philosophy  |x Metaphysics  |x Ontology  |x Monism  |x Idealism  |x Transcendental idealism  |x Kantianism 
650 4 |a Religion  |x Spiritual belief systems  |x Universalism  |x Universalist philosophy  |x Universalization 
650 4 |a Philosophy  |x Axiology  |x Ethics  |x Normative ethics  |x Morality  |x Moral principles 
650 4 |a Philosophy  |x Epistemology  |x Reason  |x Practical reason 
650 4 |a Philosophy  |x Applied philosophy  |x Social philosophy  |x Social criticism  |x Critical theory  |x Metanarratives  |x Normativity 
650 4 |a Philosophy  |x Metaphysics  |x Philosophy of mind  |x Concept of mind  |x Judgment  |x Moral judgment 
650 4 |a Social sciences  |x Communications  |x Rhetoric  |x Discourse  |x Argumentation 
650 4 |a Philosophy  |x Epistemology  |x Empiricism 
655 4 |a research-article 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia  |d Faculdade Pontifícia de Filosofia  |g 75(2019), 1, Seite 537-554  |w (DE-627)630362386  |w (DE-600)2560562-8  |x 2183461X  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:75  |g year:2019  |g number:1  |g pages:537-554 
856 4 0 |u https://www.jstor.org/stable/26625479  |3 Volltext 
912 |a GBV_USEFLAG_A 
912 |a SYSFLAG_A 
912 |a GBV_JST 
912 |a GBV_ILN_11 
912 |a GBV_ILN_20 
912 |a GBV_ILN_22 
912 |a GBV_ILN_24 
912 |a GBV_ILN_31 
912 |a GBV_ILN_39 
912 |a GBV_ILN_40 
912 |a GBV_ILN_60 
912 |a GBV_ILN_62 
912 |a GBV_ILN_63 
912 |a GBV_ILN_65 
912 |a GBV_ILN_70 
912 |a GBV_ILN_100 
912 |a GBV_ILN_110 
912 |a GBV_ILN_165 
912 |a GBV_ILN_285 
912 |a GBV_ILN_374 
912 |a GBV_ILN_702 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2001 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2003 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2005 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2006 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2007 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2008 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2009 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2010 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2011 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2014 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2015 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2018 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2020 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2021 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2026 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2027 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2044 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2050 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2056 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2057 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2061 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2107 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2190 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2949 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2950 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4012 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4035 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4037 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4046 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4112 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4126 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4242 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4251 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4305 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4307 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4322 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4323 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4325 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4326 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4335 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4346 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4392 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4393 
951 |a AR 
952 |d 75  |j 2019  |e 1  |h 537-554