Kant on the Radical Evil of Human Nature
Kant on the Radical Evil of Human Nature
复制标题
康德论人性的根本恶
DOI：
10.1111/j.1467-9191.2007.00265.x
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Paul Formosa
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Paul Formosa
在《纯粹理性范围内的宗教》一书中，康德提出了他的论点，即人性是“根本的邪恶”。[2]极端邪恶是指道德取向败坏，或者说是具有邪恶的性格。然而，康德的根本邪恶命题的连贯性经常受到质疑，康德为这个命题提供的论证的性质也受到质疑。康德对根本邪恶的论证主要包括两部分：一是邪恶的性格推导，康德认为从一个邪恶的准则可以推断出一个邪恶的性格;二是普遍性主张，康德认为所有的人都有邪恶的性格。第一个论证成功，第二个论证失败。即便如此，极端邪恶在人类中可能非常普遍，如果不是普遍的话。因此，康德的论点值得任何道德和政治理论认真对待。它值得认真对待，或者我会这样说，因为它描绘了一幅关于人类道德状况的非常可信的画面。
In his book Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason, Kant presents his thesis that human nature is “radically evil.”2 To be radically evil is to have a corrupted moral orientation or, equivalently, an evil disposition. However, the very coherency of Kant’s radical evil thesis has often been questioned, as has the nature of the argument Kant supposedly offers for this thesis. Kant’s argument for radical evil consists primarily of two parts: an evil disposition derivation, where Kant argues that from a single evil maxim one can infer an evil disposition, and the universality claim, where Kant argues that all humans have an evil disposition. The first but not second of these arguments succeeds. Even so, radical evil is likely to be very widespread, if not universally so, among humanity. As such, Kant’s thesis deserves to be taken seriously by any moral and political theory. It deserves to be taken seriously, or so I shall argue, because it paints an eminently plausible picture of the human moral condition.