@article{ART001394449},
author={Lee Jong Kwon},
title={On Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives in Kant’s Grundlegung zur der Metaphysik der Sitten},
journal={Philosophical Investigation},
issn={1598-7213},
year={2009},
volume={26},
pages={113-137},
doi={10.33156/philos.2009.26..005}
TY - JOUR
AU - Lee Jong Kwon
TI - On Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives in Kant’s Grundlegung zur der Metaphysik der Sitten
JO - Philosophical Investigation
PY - 2009
VL - 26
IS - null
PB - Institute of philosophy in Chung-Ang Univ.
SP - 113
EP - 137
SN - 1598-7213
AB - Kant classifies imperatives into two groups: hypothetical and categorical imperatives. He claims that the hypothetical imperatives are analytic and the categorical ones are synthetic a priori. This paper shows how to rephrase what Kant calls hypothetical and categorical imperatives in the form of propositions. To such hypothetical propositions we cannot apply the terms ‘analytic’ and ‘synthetic’ as Kant originally defined in his Critique of Pure Reason. So in order to speak ‘analytic’ of the hypothetical imperatives it is necessary to adopt another Kant’s definition of ‘analytic’. This paper discusses in what sense a hypothetical imperative can be said to be analytic and shows that the claim that a hypothetical imperative is analytic in the second sens leads to the claim that ought is derived from is.
Kant claimed that it can be proved that hypothetical imperatives are analytic. This paper, however, argues that Kant’s claim is not true. Firstly, Kant argues beside the point in that what he tries to prove to be true are definitely different from a hypothetical imperative whose truth he declared he would prove. Furthermore, neither the hypothetical propositions which Kant believed that he proved to be analytically true nor the hypothetical imperatives whose analytical truth he declared that he would prove are simply true, not to mention analytically true.
Kant stressed that categorical imperatives are sharply distinguished from hypothetical ones, but this paper shows how the former can be derived from the hypothetical imperatives involving the free will and investigates what conditions a categorical imperative should meet in order to be an a priori truth.
KW - Kant;moral philosophy;categorical imperative
DO - 10.33156/philos.2009.26..005
ER -
Lee Jong Kwon. (2009). On Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives in Kant’s Grundlegung zur der Metaphysik der Sitten. Philosophical Investigation, 26, 113-137.
Lee Jong Kwon. 2009, "On Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives in Kant’s Grundlegung zur der Metaphysik der Sitten", Philosophical Investigation, vol.26, pp.113-137. Available from: doi:10.33156/philos.2009.26..005
Lee Jong Kwon "On Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives in Kant’s Grundlegung zur der Metaphysik der Sitten" Philosophical Investigation 26 pp.113-137 (2009) : 113.
Lee Jong Kwon. On Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives in Kant’s Grundlegung zur der Metaphysik der Sitten. 2009; 26 113-137. Available from: doi:10.33156/philos.2009.26..005
Lee Jong Kwon. "On Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives in Kant’s Grundlegung zur der Metaphysik der Sitten" Philosophical Investigation 26(2009) : 113-137.doi: 10.33156/philos.2009.26..005
Lee Jong Kwon. On Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives in Kant’s Grundlegung zur der Metaphysik der Sitten. Philosophical Investigation, 26, 113-137. doi: 10.33156/philos.2009.26..005
Lee Jong Kwon. On Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives in Kant’s Grundlegung zur der Metaphysik der Sitten. Philosophical Investigation. 2009; 26 113-137. doi: 10.33156/philos.2009.26..005
Lee Jong Kwon. On Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives in Kant’s Grundlegung zur der Metaphysik der Sitten. 2009; 26 113-137. Available from: doi:10.33156/philos.2009.26..005
Lee Jong Kwon. "On Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives in Kant’s Grundlegung zur der Metaphysik der Sitten" Philosophical Investigation 26(2009) : 113-137.doi: 10.33156/philos.2009.26..005
