What do you think?
Rate this book
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
May 2, 2016
Someone mentioned that this book clearly explained the Groundwork in simple and understandable terms. Well, I have to disagree. In fact, I think this makes an already difficult book even more difficult.
There are two main problems here:
Firstly, Sedgwick borrows Kant's jargon throughout the whole thing. This approach would be fine as an attempt to better appreciate Kant's state of mind and is also unavoidable to an extent, but it remains inadequate for an introduction to the Groundwork, This is not a proper way to get into Kant's moral philosophy. I understand that Sedgwick tried to provide a paragraph-by-paragraph commentary, but there have to be better ways to come to grips with a text like this. Even worse, the book contained hints of verbalisms ("Kant is quite cognizant of the obscurity of these points") which certainly did not help.
Secondly, there's minimal discussion on potential controversies, and quite often, the latter are seemingly swept under the carpet with minimal and insufficient justification. For example, Sedgwick mentions that the contradiction in the will does not evoke prudential considerations for surely Kant is explicit that this is not the case. There were some paragraphs where this problem was supposedly explored, but Sedgwick's 'defence' never went anywhere and I was left with the impression that Kant is actually inconsistent. The same sort of criticism applies to the alleged equivalence of the categorical imperatives. Sedgwick attempts to defend their equivalence, but does so in 3-4 short paragraphs (not in successive order, mind you) that were, frankly, insubstantial and ultimately failed to provide cogent arguments. The treatment of Kant's controversial identification of free will with autonomy fares no better, I'm afraid. Now, I'm not suggesting that there is no way for a Kantian to get around these problems. But the fact that an introductory book does not even provide the necessary resources for a well-grounded overview, simply defeats the purpose in my view.
There are two main problems here:
Firstly, Sedgwick borrows Kant's jargon throughout the whole thing. This approach would be fine as an attempt to better appreciate Kant's state of mind and is also unavoidable to an extent, but it remains inadequate for an introduction to the Groundwork, This is not a proper way to get into Kant's moral philosophy. I understand that Sedgwick tried to provide a paragraph-by-paragraph commentary, but there have to be better ways to come to grips with a text like this. Even worse, the book contained hints of verbalisms ("Kant is quite cognizant of the obscurity of these points") which certainly did not help.
Secondly, there's minimal discussion on potential controversies, and quite often, the latter are seemingly swept under the carpet with minimal and insufficient justification. For example, Sedgwick mentions that the contradiction in the will does not evoke prudential considerations for surely Kant is explicit that this is not the case. There were some paragraphs where this problem was supposedly explored, but Sedgwick's 'defence' never went anywhere and I was left with the impression that Kant is actually inconsistent. The same sort of criticism applies to the alleged equivalence of the categorical imperatives. Sedgwick attempts to defend their equivalence, but does so in 3-4 short paragraphs (not in successive order, mind you) that were, frankly, insubstantial and ultimately failed to provide cogent arguments. The treatment of Kant's controversial identification of free will with autonomy fares no better, I'm afraid. Now, I'm not suggesting that there is no way for a Kantian to get around these problems. But the fact that an introductory book does not even provide the necessary resources for a well-grounded overview, simply defeats the purpose in my view.
September 30, 2014
This book does exactly what it sets out to do, which is to clearly explain the Groundwork in simple - sometimes repetitive - understandable terms. Reading it alongside Kant's text, I appreciated the repetition and thoroughness.
December 22, 2022
Accessible.
April 11, 2025
Sedgwick breaks the Groundwork down in a really nice way. She essentially goes paragraph by paragraph and supplements the text. I really enjoyed her interpretation and her writing is clear
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews