Universal Moral Law in Kant's Philosophy: Meaning and Application in the Modern World
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18012/arf.v11iEspecial.74599Palavras-chave:
Kant, absolute imperative, universal moral law, reason, autonomous will, modern ethics, human dignity, VietnamResumo
Immanuel Kant's moral philosophy, with the central concept of "Categorical Imperative", laid the foundation for a moral system based on reason and universality. This study explores the profound meaning of universal moral law in Kant's thought, emphasizing its role as an immutable principle that guides human behavior beyond personal gain or specific circumstances. The absolute imperative requires that every action be taken in such a way that the principle behind it can become a universal law, while respecting the human being as an end in itself and not as a means. The article analyzes how Kant constructs this concept from pure reason, sees it as the highest expression of autonomous will, and evaluates its significance in shaping moral norms. In the context of the modern world, the study examines the application of absolute imperatives to issues such as digital technology, social inequality, and environmental crises, where moral values are often challenged by economic interests and individualism. The results show that the Kant philosophy provides a coherent ethical framework to face these challenges, encouraging global responsibility and respect for human dignity. However, its rigidity also raises questions about its ability to adapt in complex situations. The article concludes that Kant's universal moral law still holds great value, providing a rational foundation for guiding ethical behavior in contemporary society, including Vietnam.
Downloads
Referências
Baquero, F. (2023). Imagining Kant’s theory of scientific knowledge: philosophy and education in microbiology. International Microbiology, 26(3), 445-457.
Capps, P. (2001). The Kantian project in modern international legal theory. European Journal of International Law, 12(5), 1003-1025.
Choy, Y. K. (2018). Cost-benefit analysis, values, wellbeing and ethics: an indigenous worldview analysis. Ecological Economics, 145, 1-9.
Cohen, A. (2008). Kant and the human sciences: Biology, anthropology and history. Palgrave Macmillan.
Ebels-Duggan, K. (2012). Kant’s political philosophy. Philosophy Compass, 7(12), 896-909.
Guyer, P. (2000). Kant on freedom, law, and happiness. Cambridge University Press.
Heubel, F., & Biller-Andorno, N. (2005). The contribution of Kantian moral theory to contemporary medical ethics: a critical analysis. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 8, 5-18.
Höffe, O. (1994). Immanuel Kant. State University of New York Press.
Johnson, D. G. (2015). Technology with no human responsibility? Journal of Business Ethics, 127(4), 707-715.
Korsgaard, C. M. (1996). Creating the kingdom of ends. Cambridge University Press.
Lerussi, N. (2018). Luigi Caranti, Kant’s political legacy: Human rights, peace, progress, Cardiff, University of Wales Press, 2017. Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society, 29(4), 629-633.
McCarty, R. (2009). Kant’s theory of action. Oxford University Press.
Ogar, T., & Bassey, S. (2023). The implications of Kantian ethics for non-rational nature/beings: A study in environmental ethics. International Journal of Environmental Pollution and Environmental Modelling, 6(2), 93-103.
O’Neill, O. (1989). Constructions of reason: Explorations of Kant’s practical philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
Rawls, J. (2000). Lectures on the history of moral philosophy. Harvard University Press.
Sedgwick, S. (2008). Kant’s groundwork of the metaphysics of morals: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
Telwani, A. A., & Peerzada, N. (2020). Immanuel Kant’s contribution to epistemology: An overview. Russian Law Journal, 8(4).
Walsh, W. H. (1981). Kant’s critique of pure reason: Commentators in English, 1875-1945. Journal of the History of Ideas, 42(4), 723-737.
Westphal, K. R. (2004). Kant’s transcendental proof of realism. Cambridge University Press.
Wood, A. W. (1999). Kant’s ethical thought. Cambridge University Press.
Arquivos adicionais
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Política de Direito Autoral para os itens publicados pela Revista:
1.Esta revista é regida por uma Licença da Creative Commons aplicada a revistas eletrônicas. Esta licença pode ser lida no link a seguir: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
2.Consonante a essa politica, a revista declara que os autores são os detentores do copyright de seus artigos sem restrição, e podem depositar o pós-print de seus artigos em qualquer repositório ou site.
Política de Direito de Uso dos Metadados para informações contidas nos itens do repositório
1. Qualquer pessoa e/ou empresa pode acessar os metadados dos itens publicados gratuitamente e a qulquer tempo.
2.Os metadados podem ser usados sem licença prévia em qualquer meio, mesmo comercialmente, desde que seja oferecido um link para o OAI Identifier ou para o artigo que ele desceve, sob os termos da licença CC BY aplicada à revista.
Os autores que têm seus trabalhos publicados concordam que com todas as declarações e normas da Revista e assumem inteira responsabilidade pelas informações prestadas e ideias veiculadas em seus artigos, em conformidade com a Política de Boas Práticas da Revista.
