Abstract
AbstractThis paper establishes a Kantian duty against screen overexposure. After defining screen exposure, I adopt a Kantian approach to its morality on the ground that Kant’s notion of duties to oneself easily captures wrongdoing in absence of harm or wrong to others. Then, I draw specifically on Kant’s ‘duties to oneself as an animal being’ to introduce a duty of self-government. This duty is based on the negative causal impact of the activities it regulates on a human being’s mental and physical powers, and, ultimately, on the moral employment of these powers. After doing so, I argue that the duty against screen overexposure is an instance of the duty of self-government. Finally, I consider some objections.
Funder
Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference66 articles.
1. Alpinar-Şencan, Zümrüt. 2016. Reconsidering Kantian arguments against organ selling. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 19 (1): 21–31.
2. Andreassen, Cecilie S., Torbjørn Torsheim, Geir S. Brunborg, and Ståle. Pallesen. 2012. Development of a facebook addiction scale. Psychological Reports 110 (2): 501–517.
3. Atwell, John E. 1986. Ends and principles in Kant’s moral thought. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
4. Aylsworth, Timothy, Clinton Castro. 2021. Is there a duty to be a digital minimalist? Journal of Applied Philosophy 1–12. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12498>
5. Bacin, Stefano. 2013. The perfect duty to oneself merely as a moral being (TL 6:428–437). In Kant’s “Tugendlehre”: a comprehensive commentary, ed. Andreas Trampota, Oliver Sensen, and Jens Timmermann, 245–268. Berlin, Boston: Walter de Gruyter.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献