z-logo
Premium
After M ac I ntyre
Author(s) -
Humbert David
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
journal of religious ethics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.306
H-Index - 20
eISSN - 1467-9795
pISSN - 0384-9694
DOI - 10.1111/jore.12058
Subject(s) - philosophy , autonomy , virtue , debt , morality , epistemology , theology , law and economics , sociology , law , political science , economics , finance
In his influential book A fter V irtue , A lasdair M ac I ntyre identifies K ierkegaard's view of ethics with that of K ant. Both K ant and K ierkegaard, according to M ac I ntyre, accept the modern paradigm of moral activity for which freedom of the will is the ultimate basis. R onald M . G reen, in K ierkegaard and K ant: The H idden D ebt , accepts and deepens this alignment between the two thinkers. G reen argues that K ierkegaard deliberately obscured his debt to K ant by a systematic “misattribution” of his ideas to other thinkers, and to classical philosophy in particular. This essay argues that M ac I ntyre and G reen are mistaken in identifying K ierkegaard with the K antian tradition of moral autonomy and that they overlook his debt to the classical conception of virtue. In casting K ierkegaard in the role of the quintessential exponent of a modern conception of freedom, they have perhaps overlooked one of the greatest critics of moral autonomy who has ever lived.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here