论罗尔斯思想中的“黑格尔因素”

罗尔斯的自由主义政治哲学与黑格尔哲学的关联是当代政治哲学中令人瞩目且极富启发的新兴议题。立足于罗尔斯从康德式道德建构主义向政治建构主义的转变,分析罗尔斯思想中的"黑格尔因素",并厘清两者关联背后的差异,可以剖析出罗尔斯在个体与国家关系问题上所采取的"第三种选项"。这一工作不仅有助于恰当地理解罗尔斯与共同体主义者之间的关系,而且有助于深入思考和探究诸如"政治认同""国家认同"等现实政治课题。     

再论康德伦理学的形式主义——兼论康德的道德目的论的意义

黑格尔对康德伦理学的形式主义所作的批评是富有影响力的,他指责康德的纯粹实践理性概念无力在内容上阐明道德的本质。而当代康德主义者在回应这一批评时,却未能在道德现象中揭示纯粹实践理性与客观价值的实质关联,也因此不能彻底反驳黑格尔的批评。通过对康德道德哲学的分析,本文将表明：一方面,形式主义进路服务于论证纯粹实践理性的可能性,并构成了对道德现象的哲学诠释的一部分;另一方面,该诠释成功地揭示了道德意识的意向结构及其事实性要素,并导向了“目的自身”的概念。因此,康德的形式主义伦理学所导向的道德目的论可以构成一种实质价值学说。在与道德目的论的关联中,康德伦理学的形式主义及其纯粹实践理性概念能够得到恰当理解和有效辩护。     

从道德建构到政治建构——论罗尔斯的制度理念

罗尔斯的政治哲学坚持政治价值的独立性,走出道德多元论的困惑,开辟了政治证明的新传统.罗尔斯吸取了康德道德建构主义的精髓,以公共理性精神为出发点,阐释了政治建构主义的证明方法.他提倡民主的政治制度,他的政治建构主义的理念与原则内在于民主政治生活,消除了先验理性的形上色彩.罗尔斯的正义原则所倡导的政治价值促进了民主政治的发展,具有更加深刻的人道主义精神.     

公共理性及其道德意义:康德与罗尔斯的诠释

公共理性是康德和罗尔斯都关注的论题之一.康德把公共理性与包括道德启蒙在内的人类启蒙相勾连,以实践理性为根据,揭示了公共理性与人格、道德律令、正义等的可能性联系.罗尔斯力图在人的一种深度自我道德启蒙的意义上,进一步阐明公共理性与自我、正义、道德感等的关系.康德和罗尔斯对公共理性及其道德意义的诠释,本质上是对现代公民道德的存在根据与根本特征的阐明.     

罗尔斯和康德思想渊源重探

从思想传记的角度看,对康德哲学的反思塑造了罗尔斯政治哲学的形成、转向和终局。学界对罗尔斯和康德思想渊源论题主要有“貌合神离说”和“近而远之说”两种观点,前者认为罗尔斯前期对其正义理论的康德式阐释是基于对康德的误读,后者认为罗尔斯后期政治理论致力于疏离康德学说。借鉴学界对康德实践哲学的新近研究会发现,“貌合神离说”误解了康德的道德心理学,而“近而远之说”则误解了康德法权论与其伦理学的关系。澄清这些误解之后会发现,罗尔斯和康德的思想实际上是一种渐近关系,即“行合趋同”。     

论元伦理学中的康德式建构主义

康德主义伦理学被怀疑论者看作一种心灵-独立的实在论,并因此遭到它的批评。实在论者则把康德主义伦理学作为一种心灵-独立的实在论加以辩护。科斯嘉承继并推进了罗尔斯所实现的康德主义的元伦理学转向,在回应对康德主义外在实在论批评和辩护的同时,提出了一种建构主义的程序实在论,并把它作为一种内在的实在论加以辩护,完成了道德实在论的内在转变。但是这种康德式建构主义却面临着这样一个困难,即它作为一种内在的实在论同时是一种非认知主义。从理论的融贯性来看,与这种康德式内在实在论相适合的应是一种康德式内在认知主义。     

论康德与罗尔斯的两种道德建构主义

康德的道德建构主义与罗尔斯的道德建构主义都运用了普遍同意的标准、有效性标准来证明各自的道德原则和正义原则,它们都属于义务论派别,绝对命令和正义原则也具有相似性。但是,康德的建构主体是形而上学的,而罗尔斯的建构主体则不具有这种形而上学的特征;康德的建构主义属于构成性自律,而罗尔斯的属于学说的自律;他们各自建构出来的原则也具有不同的适用范围。罗尔斯的转变削弱了正义原则的证明力,在后形而上学的条件下,哈贝马斯对道德客观性的认识可以提供一种解决的思路。     

论海德格尔对康德实践哲学的解读

海德格尔对康德实践哲学的解读是他阐释康德哲学的重要组成部分。本文围绕着道德情感、实践理性、实践自由等问题分析了海德格尔在这一方面的解读内容,并且指出海德格尔的解读是定向于存在论的,属于基础存在论筹划,人的存在问题是关注的核心。他力图发掘康德思想中的存在论-生存论的内涵,这反而丧失了原初的伦理学意义。     

康德自主道德的理性主义基调及其困难 ——兼论对话伦理学和康德道德哲学之关联

韦尔默在其《伦理学与对话——康德和对话伦理学中的道德判断要素》一书中基于康德道德哲学之困难,考察对话伦理学为克服其困难所做的尝试并分析其成败得失,他把康德的绝对命令理解为一种以推己及人的方式检验准则确立法则的程序,并认为这只有在预设人类可能的"共同意志"的前提下才能成立,这种对绝对命令的颇具经验主义色彩的解读因忽视康德道德哲学的理性主义基调和道德普遍主义立场而难免误读之嫌。作为道德性的最高原则,绝对命令并非程序性原则,而是表达"理性地行动"这一自主道德的要求。由此引出的论证和应用的问题是康德道德哲学的两个重要问题,也是其困难所在。就对话伦理学与康德道德哲学的关联性而言,相比于韦尔默重点分析的哈贝马斯版本的对话伦理学,阿佩尔先验语用学路向的对话伦理学更好地继承了康德的理性主义精神,紧扣康德道德哲学的问题并尝试对之进行"改造"。     

罗尔斯理性契约论中的错误

在《正义论》(1971)出版20年之后,罗尔斯公开声明,在理论中将正义理论描述为理性选择理论是部分错误的.这里包含两个主要的问题,它们关系到构建原初状态和两个正义原则的最大最小值的推论.由于在霍布斯的模型中,道德与理性是不相关的,所以罗尔斯试图构建一个公平的原初状态.因此罗尔斯的理性契约论证明是理性而公平的模型.但是这个模型犯了道德假设先于理性的循环错误,而这一点或许是理性上任意的.而且,由于它具有非常保守的规避风险的心理态度,罗尔斯就无法表明,在两个正义原则的最大最小值的策略推论中,较高级的理性会凌驾于其他策略中的理性.这些就是罗尔斯不得不承认错误的原因.出于他的正义理论的辩护策略,罗尔斯转向了康德的自由概念和平等的道德人的概念,而围绕康德的概念是存在一些争议的.     

Kantian Ethics: After Darwin

In this article I reevaluate Immanuel Kant's moral philosophy from a post–Darwinian perspective. Taking an evolutionary approach to human reasoning and incorporating some recent work on the science of the emotions, I argue that the Kantian bifurcation of reason and emotion, which underlies his moral philosophy, is no longer tenable. Kant's practical defense of his ethics as being the only option that can save morality from the dangers posed by naturalism is also considered and rejected. Instead, I argue that an evolutionary view of reason and emotion can provide an adequate ground for morality and explore the possibility and advantages of such an ethics.     

Kant on Duties Regarding Nonrational Nature: Allen W. Wood

Kant's moral philosophy is grounded on the dignity of humanity as its sole fundamental value, and involves the claim that human beings are to be regarded as the ultimate end of nature. It might be thought that a theory of this kind would be incapable of grounding any conception of our relation to other living things or to the natural world which would value nonhuman creatures or respect humanity's natural environment. This paper criticizes Kant's argumentative strategy for dealing with our duties in regard to animals, but defends both his theory and most of his conclusions on these topics.     

Amenable to reason: Aristotle's rhetoric and the moral psychology of practical ethics.

An Aristotelian conception of practical ethics can be derived from the account of practical reasoning that Aristotle articulates in is Rhetoric and this has important implications for the way we understand the nature and limits of practical ethics. an important feature of this conception of practical ethics is its responsiveness to the complex ways in which agents form and maintain moral commitments, and this has important implications for the debate concerning methods of ethics in applied ethics. In particular, this feature enables us to understand casuistry, narrative, and principlism as mutually supportive modes of moral inquiry, rather than divergent and mutually exclusive methods of ethics. As a result, an Aristotelian conception of practical ethics clears the conceptual common ground upon which practical ethicists can forge a stable and realistic self-understanding.     

Distributive justice and the minnesota health access initiative

As I have suggested, from the perspective of distributive justice MinnesotaCare's reforms are inadequate. But to coin (and alter slightly) a phrase of Kant's, if its authors do not deserve our moral esteem, perhaps they do merit our encouragement, and it is on a note of the latter that I will conclude. MinnesotaCare is an experiment in systemic incremental change being performed in a complex health care system, the only true laboratory for such an experiment. For this reason, it will provide us important information concerning the ethics, economics, [and] the politics of health care reform while improving the position of some Minnesotans in a significant way. Thus, while MinnesotaCare is susceptible to forceful moral criticism, as an experiment in reform it holds out the promise of providing us some of the data necessary for discovering a just solution.     

康德实践理性的事实概念及其对自由的证明

康德实践理性的事实概念指的是道德律或道德律的意识,而道德律本身实际上是道德律的意识。道德律是某种自身肯定的东西,它作为事实肯定了纯粹实践理性的客观实在性,并通过理性的这一积极的概念,证明了它自身在实践上的客观实在性。正是通过道德律这一事实,在思辨哲学那里只具有消极性的自由的原因性的概念,在实践哲学中获得了积极的规定,也成为了一个“事实”。     

The Murderer at the Door: What Kant Should Have Said

Embarrassed by the apparent rigorism Kant expresses so bluntly in 'On a Supposed Right to Lie,' numerous contemporary Kantians have attempted to show that Kant's ethics can justify lying in specific circumstances, in particular, when lying to a murderer is necessary in order to prevent her from killing another innocent person. My aim is to improve upon these efforts and show that lying to prevent the death of another innocent person could be required in Kantian terms. I argue (1) that our perfect Kantian duty of self-preservation can require our lying to save our own lives when threatened with unjust aggression, and (2) that Kant's understanding of moral duty was that duties are symmetrical , such that if one has a duty to perform a given action on one's own behalf or to protect one's own rational nature, then one also has a duty to perform similar acts on other's behalf or to protect their rational nature. Thus, that the individual protected against aggression by means of deception is not oneself should be of no consequence from a Kantian perspective. Lying to the murderer is thus an extension of the Kantian requirement of self-defense.     

THE ROLE OF PERCEPTION IN JONATHAN EDWARDS'S MORAL THOUGHT: The Nature of True Virtue Reconsidered

This essay provides an interpretation of Jonathan Edwards's moral thought that calls attention to the motif of perception in his conception of true virtue. The aim is to illumine the extent to which Edwards's virtue ethics can be included in and contribute to prevailing approaches to virtue in contemporary theological ethics. To advance this proposal, this essay attends to the question of moral agency that Edwards's reflections on charity, the new spiritual sense, and religious affections raise. This procedure offers an acute sense of the significance of perception for Edwards's virtue ethics, which in turn allows for a constructive Edwardsean entry into current theological discussions on the narrative character of virtue.     

Feminism,Ethics, and the Question of Theory

Feminist discussions of ethics in the Western philosophical tradition range from critiques of the substance of dominant moral theories to critiques of the very practice of “doing ethics” itself. I argue that these critiques really target a certain historically specific model of ethics and moral theory—a “theoretical-juridical” one. 1 outline an “expressive'Collaborative” conception of morality and ethics that could be a politically self-conscious and reflexively critical alternative.     

The Pleasures of Contra‐purposiveness: Kant,the Sublime,and Being Human

Serious doubts have been raised about the coherence of theories of the sublime and the usefulness of the concept. By contrast, the sublime is increasingly studied as a key function in Kant's moral psychology and in his ethics. This article combines methodological conservatism, approaching the topic from within Kant's discussion of aesthetic judgment, with reconstruction of a conception of human agency that is tenable on Kantian grounds. I argue that a coherent theory of the sublime is possible and useful, and the experience of the sublime is significant for our self‐conception as agents. However, the chief interest in the sublime is not moral.     

The Contribution of Empathy to Ethics

ABSTRACT

Empathy has been taken to play a crucial role in ethics at least since the Scottish Enlightenment. More recently, a revival of moral sentimentalism and empirical research on moral behavior has prompted a renewed interest in empathy and related concepts and on their contribution to moral reasoning and to moral behavior. Furthermore, empathy has recently entered our public discourse as having the power to ameliorate our social and political interactions with others.

The aim of this paper is to investigate the extent to which such a role can be actually granted. Before focusing on a positive assessment, I will delve into a few problems our ordinary concept of empathy and our commonsensical way of conceiving its connection to ethics will need to face. Specifically, I will show how an exaggerated reliance on the ordinary concept of empathy could lead to an underestimation of its biases and potential limitations (§ 2), how a naïve conception of its connection to morality can overlook relevant counterexamples (§ 3) and lead to forms of reductionism (§ 4). Overcoming this possible shortsightedness would pave the way for arguing in favor of an important – though not sufficient and possible neither necessary – role for empathy in ethics (§ 5).