Search
Submit an article RU
Kantian Journal

2024 Vol. 43. №1

Back to the list Download the article
ENG
Сохранить XML для: JATS (вып.)
RUS
Сохранить XML для: JATS (вып.)
Kahn S.

On a Recent Attempt to Derive Positive Duties from Kant’s Formula of Universal Law

DOI
10.5922/0207-6918-2024-1-6
Pages
128-148
Kant’s ethics Kantian ethics Formula of Universal Law Formula of a Law of Nature contradiction in willing positive duties universalisation tests Categorical Imperative

Abstract

According to the positive duties objection, it is not possible to derive positive duties from Kant’s Formula of Universal Law (FUL). However, in his recent “Deriving Positive Duties from Kant’s Formula of Universal Law”, Guus Duindam tries to answer this objection. More specifically, Duindam tries to show how both a duty of benevolence and a duty of self-perfection can be derived from the FUL. I critically examine Duindam’s arguments. I maintain that Duindam’s argument for the positive duty of benevolence is ambiguous and that this ambiguity exposes him to a fatal dilemma: on one horn, Duindam faces the same objection that he concedes to be effective against other attempts to answer the positive duties objection; on the other horn, the procedure he recommends cannot be based on the FUL (because it does not evaluate actions on the basis of their corresponding maxims). In addition, I maintain that Duindam’s benevolence argument rests on a procedure that is, in general, intractable and, in this particular case, foredoomed (because it can be shown that there are no positive duties of the kind he tries to derive). From there, I turn to Duindam’s argument for the positive duty of self-perfection. I explain that Duindam’s derivation of the duty of self-perfection, even if successful, does not answer the positive duties objection. This is because Duindam never appeals to the FUL in his derivation of the duty of self-perfection (the derivation is based, rather, on instrumental reasoning from the second-order end to accomplish our first-order ends). I elaborate on this by comparing and contrasting Duindam’s argument with Oliver Sensen’s interpretation of how to apply the FUL in the latter’s recent “Universal Law and Poverty Relief”.

Reference

Baron, M., 1995. Kantian Ethics Almost Without Apology. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Duindam, G., 2023. Deriving Positive Duties from Kant’s Formula of Universal Law. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 40(3), pp.191-201. https://doi.org/10.5406/21521026.40.3.01.

Herman, B., 1993. The Practice of Moral Judgment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Herman, B., 2007. Moral Literacy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Herman, B., 2021. The Moral Habitat. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kahn, S., 2014. Can Positive Duties be Derived from Kant’s Formula of Universal Law. Kantian Review, 19(1), pp. 93-108. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1369415413000319.

Kahn, S., 2017. Positive Duties, Maxim Realism and the Deliberative Field. Philosophical Inquiry, 41(4), pp. 2-34. https://doi.org/10.5840/philinquiry201741421.

Kahn, S., 2019. Defending the Traditional Interpretations of Kant’s Formula of a Law of Nature. Theoria, 66(158). pp. 76-102. https://doi.org/10.3167/th.2019.6615804.

Kahn, S., 2020. Positive Duties, Kant’s Universalizability Tests, and Contradictions. Southwest Philosophy Review, 36(1), pp. 113-120. https://doi.org/10.5840/swphilreview202036113

Kahn, S., 2021a. Obligatory Actions, Obligatory Maxims. Kantian Review, 26(1), pp. 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1111/papq.12422.

Kahn, S., 2021b. On the Expressive Limits of Kant’s Universalizability Tests. Kant-Studien, 112(2), pp. 299-304. https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-2021-0016.

Kahn, S., 2022a. Nary an Obligatory Maxim from Kant’s Universalizability Tests. Zeitschrift für Ethik und Moralphilosophie, 5(1), pp. 15-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42048-022-00115-0.

Kahn, S., 2022b. Why Positive Duties Cannot be Derived from Kant’s Formula of Universal Law. Philosophia, 50, pp. 1189-1206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-021-00429-0.

Kant, I., 1998. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Edited by M. Gregor and J. Timmermann. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sensen, O., 2023. Universal Law and Poverty Relief. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 26, pp. 177-190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-022-10281-0.

Stohr, K., 2011. Kantian Beneficence and the Problem of Obligatory Help. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 8(1), pp. 45-67. https://doi.org/10.1163/174552411X549372.

Wood, A., 1999. Kant’s Ethical Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.