康德自由概念的四个存在论维度

自由概念是康德哲学的核心概念,是理解康德哲学的一把钥匙.学界对康德自由概念的理解聚讼纷纭,莫衷一是:“二分法”,“三个层次”或“三步曲”.但是它们只是停留在对康德自由概念的分类和梳理层面上,并没有揭示康德自由概念的完整内涵和内在逻辑.康德是从自由的可能性、实在性、现实性和实际性四个存在论维度构建有机联系的自由理论.本文试图从这四个存在论维度恢复隐藏在康德哲学体系中自由概念的完整原貌,揭示其存在论意蕴.康德自由概念不是认识论意义上或心理学意义上的自由,而是存在论意义上自由,它揭示了人的存在的本质,即人的存在的价值、尊严、责任和权利.     

康德论人性中普遍的趋恶倾向

在《单纯理性限度内的宗教》一书中,康德一方面指出人性中的趋恶倾向是普遍的,是人生而具有的,另一方面却又坚持认为这种趋恶倾向是人自由地招致的,因而可以被归咎于人。问题在于,如果人人都不可避免地具有一种普遍的趋恶倾向,它如何可能是人自由地招致的呢?这个问题可以联系康德的人性论和他的自由概念而得到回答。人的双重本性是康德论述人性善恶的基础,感性和理性是人性的两重维度,它们体现了人性中的张力。人的意志必然受到感性本性的影响,这是人性中普遍的趋恶倾向的根源。然而,如果没有人对自由的应用,任何颠倒都不会造成,有的将仅仅是理性与感性的并存,没有孰先孰后,也就无所谓善恶。因此,人性中的趋恶倾向既是普遍的,又是人自由选择的结果。     

从二律背反到死亡驱力:齐泽克论康德形而上学难题的拉康解

在齐泽克对德国古典哲学的阐释中,康德是其着力进行重新阐释的对象之一。透过拉康的视角,齐泽克阐释了康德哲学的二律背反和根本恶等形而上学和伦理学难题,并将其与拉康思想中的性差异和死亡驱力等问题联系起来。在拉康的理论视野中,康德的二律背反和根本恶等难题,通过幻象建构而达到了符号界,因而这个难题在拉康理论中得到了解决。齐泽克通过拉康的视角对康德形而上学难题的解释,至为重要地关涉我们对拉康—齐泽克思想的理解,也必然能够使我们获得一个理解康德哲学的新维度。     

康德伦理学中的恶与抑恶的伦理

在康德伦理学中把恶作为一种隐匿的、对立的存在,是不符合康德原意的误读。同时,忽视恶的存在的康德伦理学是不完整的,善与恶共同构成了康德伦理学的完整体系。康德伦理学体系细致分析了恶的来源、形态层次以及作用功能。抑恶的伦理并不能用来概括康德伦理学,但对于有限的理性人而言却是必要的。善的培育和生成是在恶的土壤中,要在感性世界中凭借自身的力量克服根据不在此的恶,需要道德信念的坚定、道德偏好的纠正更需要勇气和力量,才能彰显人的德性光辉。     

自爱的空洞性与恶的无穷表现:一种康德式的诠释

康德在《纯然理性界限内的宗教》中将恶定义为道德法则与自爱原则间次序的颠倒,但很多研究者认为这个定义无法说明恶在现实中的无穷表现。针对这一批评,本文以康德文本为起点,遵循"从经验到先验,再从先验到经验"的逻辑顺序,首先从恶的具体准则还原出恶的先天理知结构,然后在康德实践哲学背景下的先验主体间领域探索该结构的含义,最后借助恶的先验规定反思它的经验表达,由此证明康德对恶的单一定义能够充分解释人类现实中无穷多样的恶行。     

康德与根本恶

康德在18世纪80年代把自由意志视为一种善的意志,认为自由的同时又是恶的意志是不存在的。后来康德在《单纯理性限度内的宗教》中拒绝了这种看法,认为人身上有一种内在于自己Willkür的对恶的普遍倾向,即根本恶。这种根本恶从动机二元论角度也可以表述为人在采纳道德法则和幸福作为准则的动机时颠倒了它们之间的道德次序,禀赋在动机二元论中体现为道德法则和幸福,而倾向是对这两个动机之间的等级关系的表达。所有特殊的恶的准则都有一个最高的准则即Gesinnung,这个概念使根本恶成为既是与生俱有的,又是自由选择的结果,从而使根本恶可以被归责。     

试论康德的人性与"原罪"学说

康德在《纯然理性界限内的宗教》一书中,以人性的善恶问题开始了他在后批判时期的宗教哲学论著。在《论恶的原则与善的原则的共居或论人性中的根本恶》一篇中,康德集中论述了人性的善恶和原罪的含义。本文通过梳理康德的人性论和原罪观及其交互关系,从中引出康德与基督教传统教义的原罪观在自由意志层面上的比较分析。     

学业自我概念的建构:内/外参照模型研究述评

内/外参照模型在理论上同时考虑了社会比较和维度比较两种比较方式在建构个体学业自我概念过程中的作用。近年来,对内/外参照模型的研究进展主要体现在三个方面:对该模型进行跨文化一致性检验;提出了维度比较理论;与大鱼小池效应相整合。这些研究表明学业自我概念具有学科特异性,研究者要更加注重学业自我概念及其它学业变量的学科特异性研究,并加强内/外参照模型的调节因素研究,教师及家长要引导学生合理选择比较方式。     

言语记忆对视觉选择的影响:基于维度的自动注意引导

两个实验分别考察外显和内隐言语记忆中的特征维度信息对基于维度的视觉选择性注意的自动引导作用。实验一要求被试在言语工作记忆(外显言语记忆)保持阶段完成一个视觉注意任务,结果发现了显著的一致性效应,即记忆任务相关维度和注意任务相关维度不一致条件下的注意任务反应时要显著慢于两者一致条件下的反应时;实验二采用go/no-go任务以考察内隐言语记忆对视觉选择的影响,结果也发现了类似的一致性效应。这些结果表明外显和内隐言语记忆中的抽象维度信息自动引导注意选择视场中与之匹配的视觉维度,而不管该维度是否为当前注意任务的相关维度。     

文本加工中情境模型建构的五个维度

情境模型理论是当代西方文本阅读加工的一个重要理论。该文通过详细介绍情境模型建构的空间、时间、因果、主人公、意图五大维度,以助于对情境模型理论整体理解。通过总结可知,目前国内外关于情境模型建构中的空间、因果和主人公三个维度的研究成果较多,研究范式也较为成熟,时间和意图维度则研究成果较少     

Universalizability for Collective Rational Agents: A Critique of Agentrelativism

This paper contends that a Kantian universalizability constraint on theories of practical reason in conjunction with the possibility of collective rational agents entails the surprisingly strong conclusion that no fully agent-relative theory of practical reason can be sound. The basic point is that a Kantian universalizability constraint, the thesis that all reasons for action are agent-relative and the possibility of collective rational agents gives rise to a contradiction. This contradiction can be avoided by either rejecting Kantian universalizability, the possibility of collective rational agents, or the tenability of a fully agent-relative theory of practical reason; we cannot have all three.     

An antinomy of political judgment: Kant,Arendt, and the role of purposiveness in reflective judgment

This article builds on Arendt’s development of a Kantian politics from out of the conception of reflective judgment in the Critique of Judgment. Arendt looks to Kant’s analysis of the beautiful to explain how political thought can be conceived. And yet Arendt describes such Kantian reflection as an empirical undertaking that justifies itself only in relation to the abstract principle of the moral law. The problem for such an account is that the autonomy of the moral law appears to be at odds with the social cohesion of Kantian political life. The ensuing contradiction can be deemed the antinomy of political judgment. Kant’s conception of reflective judgment offers such an inquiry considerably more to work with than Arendt uncovers. In particular, the regulative principle of the purposiveness of nature that is shown to direct all reflection can be seen to offer the solution to this antinomy.     

Practical Identities and Autonomy: Korsgaard's Reformation of Kan's Moral Philosophy

Kant has long been taxed with an inability to explain the detailed normative content of our lives by making universalizability the sole arbiter of our values. Korsgaard addresses one form of this critique by defending a Kantian theory amended by a seemingly attractive conception of practical identities. Identities are dependent on the contingent circumstances of each person's world. Hence, obligations issuing from them differ from Kantian moral obligations in not applying to all persons. Still, Korsgaard takes Kantian autonomy to mean the normativity of all obligations is rooted in universalizability. The wealth of values informing our lives is thus said to be accommodated within a Kantian framework.
After briefly explaining Korsgaard's understanding of practical identities and their role in her reformation of Kant's moral philosophy, I argue that she gives an inadequate explanation of how the obligations that arise from a person's practical identities derive their authority from the person's will. I then consider how her position might be developed to meet this objection in accordance with her allegiance to "constructivism" and I argue that the epistemic commitments of people's actual identities makes it unlikely that such a development could preserve Kantian autonomy as she interprets it.     

KANTIAN VALUE REALISM

Why should we be interested in Kant's ethical theory? One reason is that we find his views about our moral responsibilities appealing. Anyone who thinks that we should treat other people with respect, that we should not use them as a mere means in ways to which they could not possibly consent, will be attracted by a Kantian style of ethical theory. But according to recent supporters of Kant, the most distinctive and important feature of his ethical theory is not his claims about the particular ethical duties that we owe to each other, but his views about the nature of value. They argue that Kant has an account of the relationship between practical reason and value, known as “Kantian constructivism” that is far superior to the traditional “value realist” theory, and that it is because of this that we should accept his theory. ¹ 1 Korsgaard (1996a, 1996b, 2003 ).
It is now standard for both supporters and critics to claim that Kant's moral theory stands or falls with Kantian constructivism. ² 2 Gaut (1997 ), Regan (2002 ).
But this is a mistake. In this paper, I sketch a rival Kantian theory of value, which I call Kantian value realism. I argue that there is textual evidence that Kant himself accepted value realism rather than constructivism. Whilst my aim in this paper is to set out the theory clearly rather than to defend it, I will try to show that Kantian value realism is preferable to Kantian constructivism and that it is worthy of further study.     

Reasons of love: an introduction

One of the main reasons for philosophers to have embraced Humean constructivism rather than Kantian constructivism is a negative one: they believe that in the end Kantian constructivism is an unstable position. Their idea is that the Kantian constructivist can either choose to hold on to the idea of categorical reasons for action but in that case she has to be prepared to commit to (robust) moral realism (which both Humean and Kantian constructivists reject) or alternatively, she might reject (robust) moral realism but in that case she has to give up on the idea of categoricity. The aim of this paper is to defend Kantian constructivism against Humean constructivism and more specifically against recent objections raised by Sharon Street. I will do so by arguing that Kantian constructivism follows from formal, normative commitments that pertain to instrumental reasoning that Humean constructivists like Sharon Street themselves accept. More specifically I will argue that categorical reasons for action follow from applying the principle of instrumental rationality to the first-person perspective of an agent, provided that there are certain necessary means for action in general. From this follows, I will argue, that Humean constructivists should either become Kantian constructivists or that they have to become sceptics about normativity.     

On Wittgenstein's Kantian solution of the problem of philosophy

In 1931 Wittgenstein wrote: ‘the limit of language manifests itself in the impossibility of describing the fact that corresponds to (is the translation of) a sentence without simply repeating the sentence’. Here, Wittgenstein claims, ‘we are involved?…?with the Kantian solution of the problem of philosophy’. This paper shows how this remark fits with Wittgenstein's early account of the substance of the world, his account of logic, and ultimately his view of philosophy. By contrast to the currently influential resolute reading of the Tractatus, the paper argues that the early Wittgenstein did not aim at destroying the idea of a limit of language, but that the notion lies at the very heart of Wittgenstein's early view. In doing so, the paper employs and defends the Kantian interpretation of Wittgenstein's early philosophy.     

Toward a Theory of Solidarity

Many types of `other-regarding' acts and beliefs cannotbe accounted for satisfactorilyas instances of sophisticated selfishness, altruism,team-reasoning, Kantian duty, kinselection etc. This paper argues in favour ofre-inventing the notion of solidarity as ananalytical category capable of shedding importantnew light on hitherto under-explainedaspects of human motivation. Unlike altruism andnatural sympathy (which turn theinterests of specific others into one's own), orteam-reasoning (which applies exclusivelyto members of some team), or Kantian duty (whichdemands universalisable principlesof action), the essence of solidarity lies in thehypothesis that people are capable ofresponding sympathetically to (or empathising with)a condition afflicting others,irrespectively of who those others are or whetherone cares for them personally. Andwhen that condition is a social artefact, we argue,solidarity turns radical.     

KANTIAN REASONS FOR REASONS

Rüdiger Bittner has recently argued against a Kantian ‘maxims account’ of reasons for action. In this paper I argue – against Bittner – that Kantian maxims are not to be understood as reasons for action, but rather as reasons for reasons. On the interpretation presented here, Kantian maxims are the reasons for an agent's being motivated by whatever more immediate reasons actually motivate her. This understanding of Kantian maxims suggests a recognizably realist Kantian position in ethics.     

A Reply to Cholbi's 'Suicide Intervention and Non-Ideal Kantian Theory'

abstract    In his 'Suicide Intervention and Non-Ideal Kantian Theory' (2002), Michael J. Cholbi argues that nihilism and hopelessness are often motivating factors behind suicide, contrary to Immanuel Kant's prescribed motive of self-love. In light of this, Cholbi argues that certain paternalistic modes of intervention may not only be effective in preventing suicide, but are ultimately consistent with Kantian morality. This paper addresses certain perceived shortcomings in Cholbi's account of Kantian suicide intervention. Once the psychological complexities of the suicidal person are brought to bear, the suicidal person is found in many cases to be irrational at the time of her death. Because of this, rationalistic intervention strategies may prove ineffective, despite their being consistent with Kantian morality, and despite instances of suicide being non-ideal circumstances. Cholbi assumes throughout his article that suicidal human beings remain Kantian moral agents. However, because rationality represents a crucial criterion for Kantian moral agency, and because certain human beings who commit suicide are not rational, such human beings are not Kantian moral agents. Because Cholbi's intervention strategies are not applicable to (or effective towards) irrational suicidal people, his account is found incomplete.     

What is nonconceptualism in Kant’s philosophy?

The aim of this paper is to critically review several interpretations of Kantian sensible intuition. The first interpretation is the recent construal of Kantian sensible intuition as a mental analogue of a direct referential term. The second is the old, widespread assumption that Kantian intuitions do not refer to mind-independent entities, such as bodies and their physical properties, unless they are brought under categories. The third is the assumption that, by referring to mind-independent entities, sensible intuitions represent objectively in the sense that they represent in a relative, perspective-independent manner. The fourth is the construal of Kantian sensible intuitions as non-conceptual content. In this paper, I support the alternative view that Kantian sensible representation is to be seen as iconic de re presentation of objects without representational content.