Construction of rational and faith - for Kant's ethics of modern thinking

[Abstract] Kant, starting from the introduction of rational free will, and from the introduction of free will, moral law, thus completing the universality of reason on the possibility of the construction of normative Ethics. And by hanging a "God exists" to "perfection" a moral "ought", thus completing the universality of faith on how the possible construction of normative Ethics. My view, multi-cultural background of the interaction construct reason and faith can be a twenty-first century, the planning and construction of modern sexual Ethics as a way to explore.

[Paper Keywords] Kant, reason, belief, building
Whether the multi-cultural background to speak of ethical and moral norms? If so, when the very existence of the first solution of moral status - that is, the implementation of ethical issues: Ethics can implement? Youyi how to implement a paper from the Kantian rationality and Ethics of their faith the basic framework of the dual construction starting on the above two issues, to explore a modern planning and sexual morality may be built.

First, the power of reason and the lack of
According to Kant's view, philosophy, ethics goal is to lay the validity of moral law a final basis, this basis can not be built on intuition, conscience, or the production of utilitarian, while the owner should be based on generally accepted to be a rational Practical Reason "on. As the Enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant's reliance on reason is clear. In his view, people are rational beings, rational means that can act in accordance with the concept of freedom. Reason must have free and free. because it is the moral law and practical reason (along with the moral law) came to the station added to our concept of freedom above. and in Kant, the free but we are cognizant of the moral law of the ~ condition , so that freedom of the conditions to become a moral law and moral law through the realization of their own, while the practical reason is that by their own free will have the legislative competence, I am willing to do, what to order.

Practical reason has the legislative capacity, so the following requirements to be followed by the moral law: "Whatever you do, you should always make sure that the will always follows the same criteria to become a general principle of legislation. This rule can be divided into three an equivalent order: (1) I have to act this way, so I'm standing will be able to associate my behavior become the universal law of cell, (2) you have to act this way, so either your own or someone else you always treat them as objective, the total not to him only as a tool, (3) the will of all rational persons are issued by the will of the universal law. Kant here that the moral imperative that the three laws of general legislation, the purpose and will of the people is the premise of self-discipline are mutually. It is based on human equality, based on the purpose of man is not the means to ask for a universal moral law, moral law required not only for personal happiness can not only the largest part of human happiness. The universal moral law has been able to achieve is self-discipline based on the ability of the human will. Thus, in this practical reason the moral purpose of building the Kingdom ", the Kant advocated a improve the objective value of human ideals Kingdom, personal fulfillment, is not able to meet their own happiness is not based on some emotional goals, not whether to like it, but to go at the expense of personal preferences should consciously take obligations.

Kant never rely on intuition, conscience, and other personal happiness purely utilitarian rationality, build a universal ethical norms. This emphasis on ethics and experience everywhere and well-being of the opposition on the proposed ethics and reason and can not be equated to personal happiness, because if the goal of a rational rather than emotional subject completely succumbed to its own order, will lose the autonomy of practical reason, morality will be dispelled.

However, according to Kant, rational and ethical construction is only to be resolved whether the implementation of moral problems, the problems facing the implementation of moral, rational to show their lack of power. Can be the object of universal principles for The overall sense of a rational person, but a specific person as a finite rational beings, their own experience and can not be happy with nothing, he is also a sensual beings, not be allowed to pursue happiness, but should be allowed. Because of this, Kant does not depend on the kind of experience and well-being and the universality of normative ethics to just the absolute command and regulatory requirements should be, rather than fact and necessity.

Rational construction of moral and emotional well-being enjoyed with a rational and moral person should also be shared with those who are happy. But in the experience of the world, based on the categorical imperative is only "should not inevitable and can not guarantee that any rational being must have the appropriate .

Why get in a rational and moral implementation is a problem. Kant also noted this problem. He believes that the power due to their own lack of reason, expressed by making its own high moral motives, good will and other necessities of human moral values ​​can not be a single be implemented by reason itself, we must resort to the power of faith.


Second, the return of Faith
Kant's idea of ​​perfection is to complete its rational to believe the key to the transition. Greek philosophers, where excellence "concept is based on the identity of recognized morality and happiness, they analyze or from the happiness of virtue (such as Epicurus ), or from an analysis of the moral well-being (eg, Stoicism). Some scholars, although not necessarily made the righteousness and justice are more than not being the tough questions (such as Plato), But in the end or in the knowledge (reason) to resolve the problem internally. Kant denied the "virtue and happiness," the causal relationship between that can not be launched from the moral well-being ", also can not be" happy "launched Virtue . "the world will see the good people often suffer wrong, and evil is triumphant, and not be punished. Kant believed, to make virtue" and well-being not only not a contradiction, but also to achieve complete harmony with each other's perfection, which need the help of religious belief.

In Kant's view, perfection is not the supreme moral good life independent of human sensibility outside its Yuan Cheng has yet to be matched with the moral well-being, said, "the highest perfection" of perfection is the supreme good Charge moral well-being and the very satisfactory agreement with known, it has ultimate value. The ultimate value of the building than the practical reason that the ultimate ideal of human values ​​to be more wealthy and successful sexual. but perfection in the emotional experience of the world never may be realized only in freedom, immortality of the soul, and postulates the existence of God can guarantee the realization of perfection.

From the Italian Renaissance to the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, the dominant direction of the Western cultural consciousness is a recognized body of people will inevitably lead to feelings of happiness. The supreme happiness of the value, the strike was effectively a "theology of his moral law, but so bring a serious consequence, that is, a comprehensive critique of the Christian faith led to the loss and the gradual loss of moral sense of the sacred . As a rational enlightening the Enlightenment, Kant, who both made sure that the physical feeling of happiness based on "value, at the same time sad rational people in the cards and lost the true flesh, so expect to propose a link between the two, and then happiness subject to the perfection of virtue, this will inevitably also be on "the existence of God is introduced into the ethics of belief.

Kant will be introduced to the ethics of faith in God, in fact, some people not, as ~ said, with reason to kill God, but from the moral of the back door, please return to God. To maintain rational consistency from the point of view, Kant can not be in the "<Critique of Pure Reason>> repeatedly against" God's morality "(because of God" will be introduced to the existence of certain moral discipline) restoration, on the contrary, the existence of God "theory postulates the purpose of is precisely the reason can not solve its own to solve the conflict with the well-being. Meanwhile, the value of Kant firmly grasp the dimensions of the existence of God "in an attempt to reason can not achieve the perfection of the most successful, so as to address the individual human life exists limited and the unlimited pursuit of perfect rationality (perfection) to make a philosophical thought. In this sense, the field of rationalism, Kant's moral theology faith is subordinate to ethics, universal ethics is through manner of religious beliefs to build, so as to achieve should be natural. reposted elsewhere in the Research Papers Download http://www.hi138.com three, between reason and faith - the modern planning and construction of sexual morality
Modern society has entered a society for hundreds of years the rapid development of social equality, individual freedom to promote the extreme, people's lifestyles and values ​​differ more and more present, a considerable discrepancy between the pursuit of goals. The universality of the moral case specification appears to be the things that can not be achieved: from Nietzsche declared God is dead dynasties, Sartre, Foucault, Derrida and other thoughts into the air but also the universality of the norms of the digestion of being. They do not think it can not be any form of absolute values, and as the successor to the traditional virtue ethics McIntyre in his <<After Virtue>> focus demonstrates modern society can not be based on moral issues. In his view, traditional stand the inevitable and the city one of the main features of the modern phase of discord, it was not possible in the context of modernity to achieve a common good or universal justice. And a lot of people more unified value system to fall apart deplore the collapse, they stood for the complete return to the traditional, or cultural diversity to find consensus, as Rawls on "overlapping consensus view. In his view, modern society is to achieve a reasonable value of the pluralistic society and must therefore be the diverse and durable as normal conditions, so we must strive to find a consensus of the majority of people support that consensus formation is completely free, it can not even help, including national power, philosophy, religious forces external factors within the support.


I agree with Rawls multi-cultural background should be a consensus view. Revaluation of all values ​​"after all values ​​also need to be rebuilt. Although in modern society and the fact that the concept of equal value trend leaving multiple, difficult to say there is some value ultimate significance, however, including modern, including the existence of any society requires a basic moral consensus, it would be difficult to maintain. This consensus has been identified as John Rawls has said should be in the public affairs, is to regulate consensus rather than the value of consensus, as some the most basic social institutions and personal code of conduct, without which the basic norms of human society can not be sustained in fact to survive, much less coordinated development. norms, where the consensus is through the Rolls-real Most of the people of the voluntary and free to get support, it can not find external force, but how to ensure the substantial majority of people support the specification of voluntary consensus because it is voluntary or if he is free, in another case He may not have to comply with such a specification, as post-modernism that. If so, then the modern sexual morality based on consensus and how to implement my opinion, the negative power of this country's political forces to achieve consensus on the external is necessary, because if not so neglected equality. But in the absence of external forcing and internal forces driving force of the ultimate value of the case, the specification can not guarantee that a consensus can be implemented. Only the representative of J. Rawls ethicists to traditional morality does not resolve this paradox. In fact, the modern context of the ultimate value of the negation does not negate the reason for the multiple multi-cultural background of the integration and build moral effect. but this integration and certainly not a good moral building and attempted to use this "good" to replace the other moral ethics, but an attempt to seek a reasonable effort to support the value of the theoretical system. Rawls against the ultimate value of the building by the deny the universality of moral reason of the construction features, advocates of freedom, voluntary consensus standards shall be to support the value of discussing. without any restriction of liberty or voluntary consensus standard is difficult to ensure the validity and reliability. to ensure that such norms consensus can be implemented, also need the help of man's own inherent power of reason. In fact, people as a class in terms of the overall sense of rational beings, that reason itself requires to find a moral consensus. based on reason, everyone should be aware Behavior. This should not have the ultimate value of the significance of Kant's categorical imperative, but a rational after the re-integration of diverse moral and value system derived from the basic compliance with all ethical norms. This fundamental ethical Ethical norms can actually be called the bottom line, it is the human person rather than just talking the most basic measure of animal flesh, but also people's behavior at least, the minimum limit. so the basic code of ethics for all Everyone should apply. Everyone can have different life goals and values, a person can freely pursue their favorite way of life and life ideals, but must first meet this moral line. For this reason, it is itself the Non-externally to ensure the free and voluntary for people to follow.

From this perspective, the rational through the integration of diverse ethical to build for a variety of lifestyles from the universality of normative ethics. But the problem is that this universal ethics in fact involved only some of people's lives the most basic norms, it does not relate to the ultimate value of life. And the whole sense of values ​​and ideals of the human spirit, in fact, indispensable human culture an important part of the lack of it, this should actually not modernity complete. My view, has entered the modern in today requires us to abandon the re-return to modernity but to look for the traditional spiritual and moral is not practical nor possible, history is always moving forward. The key is how to deal with ultimate value of modernization and human ideals, to find a possible meeting point between the two. rationality itself can not solve this problem, i like to have to re-plug the introduction of faith, reason and faith in each other people to play both of Ethics Construction of function.

Modernity does not exclude religion, on the contrary it is precisely because the lack of faith that makes people lack modern society the pursuit of the ultimate value or just the ultimate value on emotional self-locked, people wandering in the spiritual home, but as a non-family can be attributed to the presence of those who, like the existence of itself is not perfect. and in the context of modernity, faith does not specify a particular object or a particular belief in god, which is based on a rational point above the ideal of a better life of human beings and the common values goal of a human pursuit, which in fact is using the power of faith to provide a value for human life, the pursuit of power and objectives. Intervention that is through faith that people can make modern society the pursuit of ultimate value ought to be moral. This "should be" in the modern condition itself may be difficult to achieve but also people with a family ideology. But based on the principles of equality and freedom, making the urgent need for such moral beliefs are constantly at the same time modern belief in digestion, which gives us a belief in what way will need to build the ultimate meaning of the German problem. In fact, Digestion is not modernity itself the forms of belief, it is about the digestion of faith in God, rather as bearers of value-oriented feature is based on reason and faith can not restrict people on the basic code of ethics can make a variety of value Judgement was urgently needed, is from this perspective, the interaction of reason and faith to complete construction of modern sexual ethics of the basic plan. Links http://www.hi138.com Research Papers Download