1. (652) In the reading of The Sources of Normativity, Christine Korsgaard discusses four basic theories for the justification of morality: Voluntarism, Realism, Reflective Endorsement, and the Appeal to Autonomy. For the purpose of this essay, I will be defining Voluntarism, outlining the argument that Korsgaard presents for Voluntarism, and explain her criticism for why it fails. First of all, let me start off by defining the meaning of Voluntarism. Voluntarism is the theory that God or
people happy, but rather for the reason being that it is the basic principal of doing what is considered morally right (Rosenstand, 284). “The presence of a good will is what makes an action morally good, regardless of its consequences” (Rosenstand, 284). I believe Kant’s theory to be valid and in most cases the best option when deciding if an action will be considered ethically right or not. Kant provides an example where a person is hiding in a friends closet attempting to escape a murderer who
line with what is morally right, it will shine through regardless of the consequence or outcome. There are also a few others things that must be taken into account like intent and reason. When we discuss moral law we are only talking about the maxim, due to the uncertainty of predicting consequences. Immanuel Kant’s literature titled practical philosophy contains numerous writings on his approach to moral philosophy. A chapter titled ‘on a supposed right to lie from philanthropy’ is a segment
know nothing rabble. Rousseau set me straight. This delusory superiority vanishes, I learn to honor men, and I would find myself more useless than a common laborer if I did not believe this observation could give everyone a value which restores the rights of humanity.”What Kant learned from Rousseau was the proposition that the basis of human equality is the dignity that each human person possesses in virtue of the capacity for autonomy (moral freedom). This moral freedom has two aspects, the capacity
we could percieve naturally, and contained within it human existence. Jaspers, like Kierkegaard, recognized the missing logic of his religious conclusion, but explained that his "leap of faith" was a choice—which is, of course, an expression of his right. Jaspers also valued the scientific process, and felt that it was a necessary stage in coming to understand the encompassing. He saw understading the freedom of the individual in the concrete world—and the obvious limits to that freedom—as the most
Credits and acknowledgments borrowed from other sources and reproduced, with permission, in this textbook appear on the appropriate page within text. Copyright © 2013, 2011, 2009, 2007, 2005 by Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Prentice Hall. All rights reserved. Manufactured in the United States of America. This publication is protected by Copyright, and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form