KANTS GROUNDWORK FOR THE METAPHYSICS OF MORALS:COMMENTARY PAPER: A Commentary

by Henry E. Allison

Henry E. Allison presents a comprehensive commentary on Kant's Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (1785). It differs from most recent commentaries in paying special attention to the structure of the work, the historical context in which it was written, and the views to which Kant was responding. Allison argues that, despite its relative brevity, the Groundwork is the single most important work in modern moral philosophy and that its significance lies mainly in two closely related factors. The first is that it is here that Kant first articulates his revolutionary principle of the autonomy of the will, that is, the paradoxical thesis that moral requirements (duties) are self-imposed and that it is only in virtue of this that they can be unconditionally binding. The second is that for Kant all other moral theories are united by the assumption that the ground of moral requirements must be located in some object of the will (the good) rather than the will itself, which Kant
terms heteronomy. Accordingly, what from the standpoint of previous moral theories was seen as a fundamental conflict between various views of the good is reconceived by Kant as a family quarrel between various forms of heteronomy, none of which are capable of accounting for the unconditionally binding nature of morality. Allison goes on to argue that Kant expresses this incapacity by claiming that the various forms of heteronomy unavoidably reduce the categorical to a merely hypothetical imperative.

Genres: Philosophy

389 pages, Paperback

First published October 6, 2011

Reviews

[saml · Rating 3 out of 5]

what the hell, sure

[Stijn · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most thorough analyses / commentaries on Kant's Grundlegung zur Metafysik der Sitten!

[George · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Groundwork was easier to read than many of Kant’s other works, but Allison still did a great job of explaining the bits that feel obscure. One thing I appreciate is his comparison of various interpretations of a single passage (e.g., Wood, Korsgaard, his own), instead of simply pushing his own interpretation as the right one.

[Braden · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great historical commentary by Allison. Thorough and an absolute joy to read