Emptiness Charge In Kant's Moral Philosophy

10244 Words41 Pages
he Emptiness Charge in Kant’s Moral Philosophy Introduction: The Emptiness Charge in Kant’s Moral Philosophy Chapter One: Kant’s Formalism and its Emptiness Charge 1.1 Hegel’s Empty Formalism Objection 1.1.1 The Context of Categorical Imperative 1.1.2 The Limited Interpretation of Hegel’s Emptiness Charge 1.1.3 The Systematic Interpretation of Emptiness Charge 1.2. Mill’s Utilitarianism Charge 1.2.1 Mill’s Utilitarianism 1.2.2 Mill’s Consequentialism Chapter Two: The Formalistic Expressions in Kant’s Ethical Writings 2.1. Kant’s early view 2.2. The Critique of Pure Reason 2.3. The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals 2.4. The Critique of Practical Reason 2.5. The Metaphysics of Morals Chapter Three: Rethinking the Emptiness Charge-the Formalists Reconstruction 3.1. Kantian Procedural Formalism 3.2. Two Kantian Constructivism Chapter Four: The Inspired Kantian Non-Formalism 4.1. Steinberger’s Standard View of Categorical Imperative 4.2. Dietrichson’s ‘Typic’-Mediation-Principle Chapter Five: From Kantian Value Realism to Non-Formal Values, a Kantian Strategy answering Emptiness Problem 5.1. Problems…show more content…
Kant’s first formulation of the Categorical Imperative is also named universaliszbility, all moral principles must be universalizable. This is where Categorical Imperatives (moral principles that apply to everyone) are different from merely hypothetical ones, such as ‘Jack sees a cake, Jack has an appetite for cake, but Jack will not eat the cake for his health.’ Such thinking appeals to our rationality and can be found in every major world religion most typically summarized in ‘The Golden Rule’ – treat other people as you want to be treated. It would also not make sense for me to criticize someone else for, say, breaking the speed limit if I then went and broke it
Open Document