•  113
    Kant and Sartre: Existentialism and Critical Philosophy
    with Jonathan Head, Anna Tomaschewska, Alberto Vanzo, and Sorin Baiasu
    In Sorin Baiasu (ed.), Comparing Kant and Sartre, Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 3-17. 2016.
    Kant and Sartre are two of the most significant figures in modern philosophy, and yet there has, until very recently, been little comparative research undertaken on them. Despite dealing with many shared philosophical issues, they have traditionally been taken to be too opposed to each other to render any search for possible parallels between their works a useful enterprise. Indeed, Sartre is often taken to be one of Kant’s most vocal critics in the literature, and as rather indebted to other ma…Read more
  •  99
    Thinking about Cases: Applying Kant's Universal Law Formula
    European Journal of Philosophy 26 (4): 1253-1268. 2017.
    According to a widespread view, Kant's claim that moral wrongness has its ground in a contradiction underlying every immoral action is a “bluff” rooted in “dogmatic moralism”. Ever since Benjamin Constant's exchange with Kant, counterexamples have played a crucial role in showing why Kant's “universalization procedure” fails to determine the moral validity of our judgments. Despite recent attempts to bring Kant's ethics closer to Aristotle's, these counterexamples have prevailed. Most recently, …Read more
  •  88
    Is Kant a Moral Realist?
    Kant Yearbook 4 (1): 1-22. 2012.
  •  76
    Kant’s Solution to the Euthyphro Dilemma
    Philosophia 44 (4): 1209-1228. 2016.
    Are our actions morally good because we approve of them or are they good independently of our approval? Are we projecting moral values onto the world or do we detect values that are already there? For many these questions don’t state a real alternative but a secular variant of the Euthyphro dilemma: If our actions are good because we approve of them moral goodness appears to be arbitrary. If they are good independently of our approval, it is unclear how we come to know their moral quality and ho…Read more
  •  72
    Categories of Freedom as Categories of Practical Cognition
    Kantian Review 20 (2): 211-234. 2015.
    Kant famously claims that the table of the categories of freedom does not require explanation. Kant interpreters have been baffled by this claim, and the disagreement among the increasing number of studies in more recent years suggests that the table is not as straightforward as Kant took it to be. In this article I want to show that a coherent interpretation of the table depends essentially on a clarification of what have been taken to be three fundamental ambiguities in Kants text is, I argue,…Read more
  •  63
    Kant on Human Dignity
    Kant Studien 106 (1): 78-87. 2015.
    Name der Zeitschrift: Kant-Studien Jahrgang: 106 Heft: 1 Seiten: 78-87
  •  56
    Kant und das Problem der Zurechenbarkeit
    Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 61 (2). 2007.
    Nach einer verbreiteten Auffassung kann Kant die Zurechenbarkeit menschlicher Handlungen nicht erklären, weil seine Freiheitstheorie impliziere, dass ausschließlich die moralisch guten Handlungen freie Handlungen sind. Folgt man Kants Kritikern, hätte er Freiheit als ein Wahlvermögen für oder gegen das moralisch Gebotene bestimmen müssen. In diesem Aufsatz wird dafür argumentiert, dass diese empirische Definition für Kant aus erkenntniskritischen Gründen ausscheidet und er mit der nicht-empirisc…Read more
  •  42
    Kant on the Justification of Moral Principles
    Kant Studien 108 (1): 55-88. 2017.
    Name der Zeitschrift: Kant-Studien Jahrgang: 108 Heft: 1 Seiten: 55-88.
  •  19
    Bad Facts and Principles: Finding the Right Kind of Fact-Insensitivity
    Moral Philosophy and Politics 10 (2): 267-283. 2023.
    David Estlund holds that ultimate normative principles are insensitive to bad facts. This is a deliberately twisted appropriation of Jerry Cohen’s famous dictum that ultimate normative principles are fact-insensitive. In this paper, I will show why Estlund’s twist misses the point of Cohen’s argument. The fact-insensitivity claim is not a requirement to eliminate all facts from our normative theories because facts necessarily make these theories concessive. Instead, it may help us to locate the …Read more
  •  17
    Why Kant Is Not a Moral Intuitionist
    In Elke Elisabeth Schmidt & Robinson dos Santos (eds.), Realism and Antirealism in Kant's Moral Philosophy: New Essays, De Gruyter. pp. 179-196. 2017.
    In this paper, I argue against the view, most eloquently advocated by Dieter Schönecker, that Kant is what I call a “sensualist intuitionist.” Kant’s text does not accommodate a sensualist intuitionist reading; the fact of reason is cognized by reason, not intuition. I agree with Schönecker that the feeling of respect for the moral law makes us feel its obligatory character, but I disagree that this feeling constitutes cognition of the normative content of the moral law. We do not cognize the va…Read more
  •  17
    Just Economy. Rescuing the Camping Trip
    Journal of Value Inquiry 1-16. forthcoming.
  •  8
    In der Reihe werden herausragende monographische Untersuchungen und Sammelbände zu allen Aspekten der Philosophie Kants veröffentlicht, ebenso zum systematischen Verhältnis seiner Philosophie zu anderen philosophischen Ansätzen in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Veröffentlicht werden Studien, die einen innovativen Charakter haben und ausdrückliche Desiderate der Forschung erfüllen. Die Publikationen repräsentieren den aktuellsten Stand der Forschung.
  •  5
    Making Room for Applied Ethics in Kant
    In Violetta L. Waibel, Margit Ruffing & David Wagner (eds.), Natur und Freiheit. Akten des XII. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses, De Gruyter. pp. 1745-1752. 2018.
  •  4
    The Value of Freedom
    In Camilla Serck-Hanssen & Beatrix Himmelmann (eds.), The Court of Reason: Proceedings of the 13th International Kant Congress, De Gruyter. pp. 433-440. 2021.
  •  3
    Ideale Theorie
    In Johannes Frühbauer, Michael Reder, Michael Roseneck & Thomas M. Schmidt (eds.), Rawls-Handbuch: Leben – Werk – Wirkung, J.b. Metzler. pp. 289-293. 2023.
    Mit seiner Unterscheidung zwischen idealer und nicht-idealer Theorie hat John Rawls eine der zentralen Methodendiskussionen der gegenwärtigen politischen Philosophie angestoßen (vgl. Simmons 2010; Valentini 2012). An dieser Alternative entzündete sich später auch grundlegende Kritik an Rawls’ Werk. Die Unterscheidung wird in Eine Theorie der Gerechtigkeit eingeführt (Rawls 1971, 9), um die Zielsetzung und die Grenzen von Rawls’ Theorieansatz zu bestimmen.
  •  1
    Kants Theorie der Freiheit. Rekonstruktion und Rehabilitierung
    Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 69 (1): 155-157. 2007.
  •  1
    Die Deduktion des Kategorischen Imperativs
    In Kants Begründung von Freiheit und Moral in Grundlegung III, . pp. 83-108. 2015.