Christine Korsgaard which the normative question took shape in the debates of modern .. And that is the source of normativity.l3 So the argument shows. Christine M. Korsgaard, The Sources of Normativity (Cambridge: Cambridge reflection leads ineluctably to her endorsement of the source of moral claims. The Sources of Normativity has ratings and 12 reviews. Anthony said: Somewhere in the middle of this book you get the feeling that you may, in fact.
||5 June 2005
|PDF File Size:
|ePub File Size:
||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
The Sources of Normativity – Christine M. Korsgaard – Google Books
Tyler Windham rated it it was amazing Apr 27, To ask other readers questions about The Sources of Normativityplease sign up. Korsgaard seeks to answer the “nor Your reasons express your identity, your nature; your obligations spring from what that identity forbids.
Erin rated it it was ok Sep 22, Cambridge University PressJun 28, – Philosophy – pages. Kant’s theory that normativity springs from our own autonomy emerges as a synthesis of the other three, and Korsgaard concludes with her own version of the Kantian account.
In an undergrad philosophy class on problems in ethical theory, taught by libertarian James Stacey Taylor who introduced me to the IHSwe were required to write words-or-less summaries of normativiy chapter of the philosophy books we were reading.
Chris rated it really liked it Mar 28, Cambridge University Press Amazon.
The Sources of Normativity by Christine M. Korsgaard
Her normarivity is Kantian, with an emphasis on practical identity. For to violate them is to lose your integrity and so your identity, and to no longer be who you are.
For Korsgaard, our universal human nature is what allows us to all act reflectively. Want to Read Currently Reading Read.
Summary: Korsgaard’s Sources of Normativity
Sun Liu rated it it was ok Jun 13, Reuben Mackey rated it it was amazing Oct 10, Selected pages Title Page. JL Vanderhoek rated it really liked it Aug 25, Herein lies our moral obligations to others. Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account. Philosophy should always be in lecture form and always be this exciting. Four lectures by a well-known philosopher, published as a book, with critical commentaries by a few notable colleagues, namely, Thomas Nagel, Bernard Williams, GA Cohen, and Raymond Guess.
Charles rated it it was amazing Nov 03, Ethical concepts are, or purport to be, normative.
Open Preview See a Problem? Reason humanity and themorallaw. Korsgaard makes one too many logical leaps, in the traditional callous Kantian sense, of thinking just because someone does reason X, they will and must do X. Oct 26, Jocelyn foxonbooks rated it really liked it. Cambridge University Press Amazon. Recommended to Anthony by: Oct 15, C rated it it was ok. First of all, Korsgaard wants to ask “the normative question,” that is, what justifies the claims morality makes on us.
Korsgaard Limited preview – Nagel’s objections seem to me the most convincing of the four, but it is worth reading The Sources of Normativity for anyone who wants to decide for themselves. One of the challenges with the book, and it does weigh a bit on my review of the book, is that the language is often more obscure and technical than it needs to be, and dwells on a lot of references within the lit Korsgaard is a legend in modern ethics and meta-ethics, and this book is a pretty good illustration of why that is.
The Sources of Normativity
korsgaarv Since human beings have only reasons that can be shared, if we value our own humanity we must recognize that we share that humanity with others and so must value the humanity of others as well. We can do this with a maxim, for it has the form of a law by virtue of its intrinsic properties, and it is this that makes it a final reason for action.
If you’re not, move along. Korsgaard turns inward the voluntarist formulation of legislator and citizen, positing the thinking self and acting self as our double nature. Autonomy requires self-imposed laws, which cannot be picked arbitrarily. But let’s start at the beginning and watch the failure unfold. However, she rejects the commonly held belief that reasons are private, and that one can derive public reasons from private reasons.