ipl-logo

Non-Formal Values Controversy In Kant's Moral Philosophy

407 Words2 Pages

The Formal and Non-Formal Values Controversy in Kant’s Moral Philosophy

This paper will focus on the Formal and Non-Formal Values controversy in Kant’s Moral Philosophy. Primary in this line of inquiry is the question of whether Kant explicitly or implicitly support the formal and Non-Formal Values in his theory. In recent, the Kantian philosophers, Korsgarrd 1990, O’Neil 1992, Wood 2000; as the formal value opponents, claim that such value derives from Kant’s formal ethics where moral law is formal and universal, the universality is a syntactic aspect of every permissible, universalized maxim, which is a formally structured maxim. And the unity of three formulations of categorical imperative tends to emphasize the formal value of humanity, …show more content…

The controversy arises when the advocates of formal value supports have sometimes been quite aggressive in their attacks on non-formal value. In turn, the non-formal value supporters often have accused a too abstract understanding of humanity that vacates or confuses some of the central issues of morality. Reith 2006, Timmons 2010 have begun to reexamine the non-formal value and its possible role within a contemporary understanding of the moral life.
I suggest, a distinguishing feature of moral value is in other features of the moral life, such as moral decisions and moral problems, similar questions can be asked. What is the difference between moral decisions and non- moral decisions? How do moral decisions differ from other kinds of decision? In general, how does a moral x differ from a non-moral x, whatever x may be?
In this article, I examine an exegetical controversy regarding Kant 's theory of Morality which centers on this well-known topic. My enquiry will provide a fresh point of moral decision for the nature of the moral value. I shall of course make my own selection of formal value, and shall be concerned in the first place differ from non-moral values; I take the second formulation is its function in regulating speak both of not treat ones as merely means and of always, and for some

Open Document