Kant, casuistry and casuistical questions

Rudolf Schuessler

22 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Philosophy of Education

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Kantian Philosophy and Modern Interpretations Philosophical Ethics and Theory Philosophy and Historical Thought

Abstract

Abstract Interest in the role of casuistry and casuistical questions in Kant's Doctrine of Virtue (DV), i.e. the second part of the Metaphysics of Morals, has grown in recent years. My own position is formulated in Schuessler (2012, in German), the main thesis of which will be retained here in an updated form and with some shifts of emphasis. I hold that the casuistical questions concerning perfect duties in the DV are not intended to represent casuistry in Kant's sense. Casuistry and casuistical questions are neither equivalent in the DV nor do they serve the same purposes.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 22 citations exist upstream.

References

1998Critique of Pure Reason 2007Anthropology, History, and Education 1988Abuse of Casuistry 1997Lectures on Ethics 2000Kant’s Impure Ethics 1988Conscience and Casuistry in Early Modern Europe 2001Moral Self-Regard: Duties to Oneself in Kant's Moral Theory 2017Uncertainty in Post-Reformation Catholicism: A History of Probabilism

Cited by

2021Kant on thinking for oneself and with others—the ethical a priori, openness and diversity

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.