Affiliation:
1. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Human Abilities Centre for Advanced Studies in the Humanities, Institut für Philosophie 6, Unter den Linden Berlin Germany
Abstract
Abstract
While it is uncontroversial that Kantian constructivism has implications for normative ethics, its status as a metaethical view has been contested. In this article, I provide a characterisation of metaethical Kantian constructivism that withstands these criticisms. I start by offering a partial defence of Sharon Street’s practical standpoint characterisation. However, I argue that this characterisation, as presented by Street, is ultimately incomplete because it fails to demonstrate that the claims of Kantian constructivism constitute a distinctive contribution to metaethics. I then try to complete the practical standpoint characterisation by elaborating on Christine Korsgaard’s suggestion that metaethical Kantian constructivism takes up a position on the source of morality’s normativity.
Reference60 articles.
1. Bagnoli, Carla (ed.) (2013a): Constructivism in Ethics, Cambridge.
2. Bagnoli, Carla (2013b): Introduction, in: C. Bagnoli (ed.): Constructivism in Ethics, Cambridge, pp. 1 – 21.
3. Bagnoli, Carla (2013c): Constructivism about Practical Knowledge, in: C. Bagnoli (ed.): Constructivism in Ethics, Cambridge, pp. 153 – 182.
4. Bagnoli, Carla (2016): Kantian Constructivism and the Moral Problem, in: Philosophia 44, pp. 1229 – 1246.
5. Bagnoli, Carla (2021): Constructivism in Metaethics, in: E. N. Zalta (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2021 Edition), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2021/entries/constructivism-metaethics/.