"How did Rousseau's outlook work its way into Kant's moral philosophy? If for Rousseau, it is by following the "general will" that we can be said to be free; for Kant, it is by obeying those moral laws that we would will as universal laws. Moral laws that we would will as universal laws are given not by our individual will but by our rational will, which we have in common with all other rational beings."
"For Kant, this capacity to overrule our individual will lies at the heart of our special dignity. The Categorícal Imperative vs. the Golden Rule When obeying those moral laws that we could consistently and rationally will as universal laws, we are following the so-called Categorical Imperative, which might be re-stated as, "Always act such that the maxim of your action can at the same time be upheld as a universal law.""
Kant integrates Rousseau's notion of freedom by grounding freedom in obedience to moral laws that individuals could will as universal. Moral laws are not derived from individual desires but from a rational will shared by all rational beings. This rational will allows agents to override selfish or frivolous impulses to promote rules that sustain a better society. Conforming to universal moral law liberates individuals from irrational appetites rather than making them slaves. The Categorical Imperative requires acting only on maxims that could be consistently universalized, distinguishing it from the Golden Rule's dependence on subjective desire.
Read at Psychology Today
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]