Good, Evil, and the Necessity of an Act
Kant asserts that the formula of the schools nihil appetimus, nisi sub ratione boni is undoubtedly certain when clearly expressed (KpV 177). Conversely, doubt reflects a failure clearly to express it. Once we comprehend the concepts of the formula, of the good (bonum) and of desire (appetitus), th...
| Published in: | Ethical theory and moral practice |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Springer Science + Business Media B. V
[2018]
|
| In: |
Ethical theory and moral practice
|
| RelBib Classification: | NBE Anthropology NCA Ethics TJ Modern history VA Philosophy |
| Further subjects: | B
First-person perspective
B Practical deliberation B Evil B Guise of the bad B Kant |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | Kant asserts that the formula of the schools nihil appetimus, nisi sub ratione boni is undoubtedly certain when clearly expressed (KpV 177). Conversely, doubt reflects a failure clearly to express it. Once we comprehend the concepts of the formula, of the good (bonum) and of desire (appetitus), there is no doubting it. In recent times, the formula has fallen into doubt. If Kant is right, then this shows a lack of clarity with respect to the concepts the formula conjoins. I want to suggest that Kant is right: the formula of the schools is undoubtedly certain. I first explain in Kant's own terms why there is no such thing as doubting the formula. Then I approach it from a different angle, provided by what I take to be the unclarity that affects current thought on the topic. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1572-8447 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Ethical theory and moral practice
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s10677-017-9853-7 |