Combining Philosophers

Ideas for William Paley, Nicholas Rescher and Georg W.F.Hegel

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these philosophers

display all the ideas for this combination of philosophers

4 ideas

23. Ethics / D. Deontological Ethics / 3. Universalisability
You can't have a morality which is supplied by the individual, but is also genuinely universal [Hegel, by MacIntyre]
     Full Idea: Hegel attacks doctrines which are attempts by the individual to supply his own morality, and at one and the same time, to claim for it a genuine universality.
     From: report of Georg W.F.Hegel (Elements of the Philosophy of Right [1821]) by Alasdair MacIntyre - A Short History of Ethics Ch.15
     A reaction: Hegel clearly has Kant in mind. It is a penetrating criticism. Of course, there is no reason why a universal mathematical proof shouldn't be 'provided' by the individual. The Kantian seeks agreement. See Contractualism.
23. Ethics / D. Deontological Ethics / 4. Categorical Imperative
The categorical imperative lacks roots in a historical culture [Hegel, by Bowie]
     Full Idea: Hegel criticised the categorical imperative for lacking any roots in the moral habits and practices which develop in actual historical communities.
     From: report of Georg W.F.Hegel (Elements of the Philosophy of Right [1821]) by Andrew Bowie - German Philosophy: a very short introduction 1
     A reaction: This is the gist of Alasdair MacIntyre's defence of virtue theory, against rational Enlightenment ethics. Charles Taylor made the link to Hegel.
Be a person, and respect other persons [Hegel]
     Full Idea: The commandment of right is: be a person, and respect other persons
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Elements of the Philosophy of Right [1821], 036)
     A reaction: This seems to be presented as a categorical imperative. He implies that you can choose whether to be a person, which seems wrong. I love making 'respect other persons' the supreme command - but I prefer 'respect everything'.
The categorical imperative is fine if you already have a set of moral principles [Hegel]
     Full Idea: The proposition 'Consider whether your maxim can be asserted as a universal principle' would be all very well if we already had determinate principles concerning how to act.
     From: Georg W.F.Hegel (Elements of the Philosophy of Right [1821], 135 add)
     A reaction: Excellent! I have always taken this to be the overwhelming problem with Kant's theory. Kant's examples always presume a set of unquestioned conventional values. Kant offers a framework for moral thought, but values are what matter.