Mixing
How does autonomy as defined by Kant relate to respect for others?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I understand what Autonomy means. However, I fail to understand how it maps on to respect for others.
kant
asked 58 mins ago
inspired_learner
404
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I understand what Autonomy means. However, I fail to understand how it maps on to respect for others.
kant
asked 58 mins ago
inspired_learner
404
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I understand what Autonomy means. However, I fail to understand how it maps on to respect for others.
kant
asked 58 mins ago
inspired_learner
404
I understand what Autonomy means. However, I fail to understand how it maps on to respect for others.
kant
kant
asked 58 mins ago
inspired_learner
404
asked 58 mins ago
inspired_learner
404
asked 58 mins ago
inspired_learner
404
asked 58 mins ago
inspired_learner
404
asked 58 mins ago
inspired_learner
404
404
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
This is described towards the end of the second section of the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
The definition of autonomy is:
Autonomy of the will is the characteristic of the will by which it is a law
to itself (4:440)
The link between autonomy and respect for others is the defining core of the concept of what he calls kingdom of ends:
[E]very rational being, as an
end in itself, must be able to view itself as at the same time universally legislating with regard to any law whatsoever to which it may
be subject, because it is' just this ï¬Âttingness of its maxims for universal
legislation that marks it out as an end in itself; likewise that this dignity
(prerogative) it [i.e. a rational being] has above all merely natural beings brings with it that
it must always take its maxims from the point of view of itself, but also
at the same time of every other rational being as legislating (which are
therefore also called persons). Now in this way a world of rational beings (mundus intelligibilis) as a kingdom of ends is possible, and possible
through their own legislation of all persons as members. (4:438, bolded mine)
In other words: As autonomy is about the will being a law to itself and is a property of rational beings as such, any "legislating act", i.e. determining how things should be per autonomy, has to consider the autonomy of every other rational being, i.e. their dignity.
This means that the concept of the autonomy of the will itself entails the respect for the autonomy of others, i.e. their dignity, because autonomy is something that pertains to the will of every finite rational being:
[T]he legislation
that determines all worth [i.e. autonomy of the will of a finite rational being] must itself have a dignity, i.e. unconditional,
incomparable worth, for which the word respect alone makes a beï¬Âtting
expression of the estimation a rational being is to give of it. Autonomy is
thus the ground of the dignity of a human and of every rational nature. (4:436)
The reason for why it pertains to every (finite) rational being is beyond the scope of this question, but comes down to the fact that all the analysis of the second section which results in the concept of autonomy started with the concept of the will of a (finite) rational being as such. Thus, autonomy is a concept entailed in the concept of the will of a (finite) rational being and thus trivially pertains to every (finite) rational being. Well, according to Kant's argument, that is.
answered 33 mins ago
Philip Klöcking♦
8,07322653
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
This is described towards the end of the second section of the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
The definition of autonomy is:
Autonomy of the will is the characteristic of the will by which it is a law
to itself (4:440)
The link between autonomy and respect for others is the defining core of the concept of what he calls kingdom of ends:
[E]very rational being, as an
end in itself, must be able to view itself as at the same time universally legislating with regard to any law whatsoever to which it may
be subject, because it is' just this ï¬Âttingness of its maxims for universal
legislation that marks it out as an end in itself; likewise that this dignity
(prerogative) it [i.e. a rational being] has above all merely natural beings brings with it that
it must always take its maxims from the point of view of itself, but also
at the same time of every other rational being as legislating (which are
therefore also called persons). Now in this way a world of rational beings (mundus intelligibilis) as a kingdom of ends is possible, and possible
through their own legislation of all persons as members. (4:438, bolded mine)
In other words: As autonomy is about the will being a law to itself and is a property of rational beings as such, any "legislating act", i.e. determining how things should be per autonomy, has to consider the autonomy of every other rational being, i.e. their dignity.
This means that the concept of the autonomy of the will itself entails the respect for the autonomy of others, i.e. their dignity, because autonomy is something that pertains to the will of every finite rational being:
[T]he legislation
that determines all worth [i.e. autonomy of the will of a finite rational being] must itself have a dignity, i.e. unconditional,
incomparable worth, for which the word respect alone makes a beï¬Âtting
expression of the estimation a rational being is to give of it. Autonomy is
thus the ground of the dignity of a human and of every rational nature. (4:436)
The reason for why it pertains to every (finite) rational being is beyond the scope of this question, but comes down to the fact that all the analysis of the second section which results in the concept of autonomy started with the concept of the will of a (finite) rational being as such. Thus, autonomy is a concept entailed in the concept of the will of a (finite) rational being and thus trivially pertains to every (finite) rational being. Well, according to Kant's argument, that is.
answered 33 mins ago
Philip Klöcking♦
8,07322653
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
This is described towards the end of the second section of the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
The definition of autonomy is:
Autonomy of the will is the characteristic of the will by which it is a law
to itself (4:440)
The link between autonomy and respect for others is the defining core of the concept of what he calls kingdom of ends:
[E]very rational being, as an
end in itself, must be able to view itself as at the same time universally legislating with regard to any law whatsoever to which it may
be subject, because it is' just this ï¬Âttingness of its maxims for universal
legislation that marks it out as an end in itself; likewise that this dignity
(prerogative) it [i.e. a rational being] has above all merely natural beings brings with it that
it must always take its maxims from the point of view of itself, but also
at the same time of every other rational being as legislating (which are
therefore also called persons). Now in this way a world of rational beings (mundus intelligibilis) as a kingdom of ends is possible, and possible
through their own legislation of all persons as members. (4:438, bolded mine)
In other words: As autonomy is about the will being a law to itself and is a property of rational beings as such, any "legislating act", i.e. determining how things should be per autonomy, has to consider the autonomy of every other rational being, i.e. their dignity.
This means that the concept of the autonomy of the will itself entails the respect for the autonomy of others, i.e. their dignity, because autonomy is something that pertains to the will of every finite rational being:
[T]he legislation
that determines all worth [i.e. autonomy of the will of a finite rational being] must itself have a dignity, i.e. unconditional,
incomparable worth, for which the word respect alone makes a beï¬Âtting
expression of the estimation a rational being is to give of it. Autonomy is
thus the ground of the dignity of a human and of every rational nature. (4:436)
The reason for why it pertains to every (finite) rational being is beyond the scope of this question, but comes down to the fact that all the analysis of the second section which results in the concept of autonomy started with the concept of the will of a (finite) rational being as such. Thus, autonomy is a concept entailed in the concept of the will of a (finite) rational being and thus trivially pertains to every (finite) rational being. Well, according to Kant's argument, that is.
answered 33 mins ago
Philip Klöcking♦
8,07322653
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
This is described towards the end of the second section of the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
The definition of autonomy is:
Autonomy of the will is the characteristic of the will by which it is a law
to itself (4:440)
The link between autonomy and respect for others is the defining core of the concept of what he calls kingdom of ends:
[E]very rational being, as an
end in itself, must be able to view itself as at the same time universally legislating with regard to any law whatsoever to which it may
be subject, because it is' just this ï¬Âttingness of its maxims for universal
legislation that marks it out as an end in itself; likewise that this dignity
(prerogative) it [i.e. a rational being] has above all merely natural beings brings with it that
it must always take its maxims from the point of view of itself, but also
at the same time of every other rational being as legislating (which are
therefore also called persons). Now in this way a world of rational beings (mundus intelligibilis) as a kingdom of ends is possible, and possible
through their own legislation of all persons as members. (4:438, bolded mine)
In other words: As autonomy is about the will being a law to itself and is a property of rational beings as such, any "legislating act", i.e. determining how things should be per autonomy, has to consider the autonomy of every other rational being, i.e. their dignity.
This means that the concept of the autonomy of the will itself entails the respect for the autonomy of others, i.e. their dignity, because autonomy is something that pertains to the will of every finite rational being:
[T]he legislation
that determines all worth [i.e. autonomy of the will of a finite rational being] must itself have a dignity, i.e. unconditional,
incomparable worth, for which the word respect alone makes a beï¬Âtting
expression of the estimation a rational being is to give of it. Autonomy is
thus the ground of the dignity of a human and of every rational nature. (4:436)
The reason for why it pertains to every (finite) rational being is beyond the scope of this question, but comes down to the fact that all the analysis of the second section which results in the concept of autonomy started with the concept of the will of a (finite) rational being as such. Thus, autonomy is a concept entailed in the concept of the will of a (finite) rational being and thus trivially pertains to every (finite) rational being. Well, according to Kant's argument, that is.
answered 33 mins ago
Philip Klöcking♦
8,07322653
This is described towards the end of the second section of the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
The definition of autonomy is:
Autonomy of the will is the characteristic of the will by which it is a law
to itself (4:440)
The link between autonomy and respect for others is the defining core of the concept of what he calls kingdom of ends:
[E]very rational being, as an
end in itself, must be able to view itself as at the same time universally legislating with regard to any law whatsoever to which it may
be subject, because it is' just this ï¬Âttingness of its maxims for universal
legislation that marks it out as an end in itself; likewise that this dignity
(prerogative) it [i.e. a rational being] has above all merely natural beings brings with it that
it must always take its maxims from the point of view of itself, but also
at the same time of every other rational being as legislating (which are
therefore also called persons). Now in this way a world of rational beings (mundus intelligibilis) as a kingdom of ends is possible, and possible
through their own legislation of all persons as members. (4:438, bolded mine)
In other words: As autonomy is about the will being a law to itself and is a property of rational beings as such, any "legislating act", i.e. determining how things should be per autonomy, has to consider the autonomy of every other rational being, i.e. their dignity.
This means that the concept of the autonomy of the will itself entails the respect for the autonomy of others, i.e. their dignity, because autonomy is something that pertains to the will of every finite rational being:
[T]he legislation
that determines all worth [i.e. autonomy of the will of a finite rational being] must itself have a dignity, i.e. unconditional,
incomparable worth, for which the word respect alone makes a beï¬Âtting
expression of the estimation a rational being is to give of it. Autonomy is
thus the ground of the dignity of a human and of every rational nature. (4:436)
The reason for why it pertains to every (finite) rational being is beyond the scope of this question, but comes down to the fact that all the analysis of the second section which results in the concept of autonomy started with the concept of the will of a (finite) rational being as such. Thus, autonomy is a concept entailed in the concept of the will of a (finite) rational being and thus trivially pertains to every (finite) rational being. Well, according to Kant's argument, that is.
answered 33 mins ago
Philip Klöcking♦
8,07322653
edited 13 mins ago
answered 33 mins ago
Philip Klöcking♦
8,07322653
answered 33 mins ago
Philip Klöcking♦
8,07322653
answered 33 mins ago
Philip Klöcking♦
8,07322653
8,07322653
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphilosophy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f56818%2fhow-does-autonomy-as-defined-by-kant-relate-to-respect-for-others%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password