Book contents
- Practical Philosophy from Kant to Hegel
- Practical Philosophy from Kant to Hegel
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- 1 The Original Empty Formalism Objection
- 2 Freedom and Ethical Necessity
- 3 Maimonides and Kant in the Ethical Thought of Salomon Maimon
- 4 Erhard on Right and Morality
- 5 Erhard on Revolutionary Action
- 6 Elise Reimarus on Freedom and Rebellion
- 7 Freedom and Duty
- 8 Fichte’s Ethical Holism
- 9 Jacobi on Revolution and Practical Nihilism
- 10 The Political Implications of Friedrich Schlegel’s Poetic, Republican Discourse
- 11 The Limits of State Action
- 12 Echoes of Revolution
- 13 Public Opinion and Ideology in Hegel’s Philosophy of Right
- Bibliography
- Index
7 - Freedom and Duty
Kant, Reinhold, Fichte
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 March 2021
- Practical Philosophy from Kant to Hegel
- Practical Philosophy from Kant to Hegel
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- 1 The Original Empty Formalism Objection
- 2 Freedom and Ethical Necessity
- 3 Maimonides and Kant in the Ethical Thought of Salomon Maimon
- 4 Erhard on Right and Morality
- 5 Erhard on Revolutionary Action
- 6 Elise Reimarus on Freedom and Rebellion
- 7 Freedom and Duty
- 8 Fichte’s Ethical Holism
- 9 Jacobi on Revolution and Practical Nihilism
- 10 The Political Implications of Friedrich Schlegel’s Poetic, Republican Discourse
- 11 The Limits of State Action
- 12 Echoes of Revolution
- 13 Public Opinion and Ideology in Hegel’s Philosophy of Right
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
By closely connecting “free” and “dutiful” action, Kant appeared to some of his contemporaries to have a serious problem with the imputability of immoral actions. K. L. Reinhold attempted to avoid this problem by introducing a sharp distinction between freedom of choice (Willkür) and practical reason (as expressed through Wille), such that any free action must involve a choice between “selfish” and “unselfish” drives. After Kant rejected Reinhold’s proposed distinction, Fichte defended it by introducing a new distinction between the original, purely “formal” freedom of every spontaneously self-positing I and the “material” freedom that every I strives to achieve.Whereas formal freedom concerns the choice of means to predetermined ends, material freedom determines the ends as well as the means of acting.Fichte provides a detailed account of how a formally free individual might acquire material freedom through a series of “reflections” upon formal freedom, at which point freedom of choice is supposed to coincide with the categorical demands of the moral law—and Willkür with Wille.Fichte’s distinction between kinds and degrees of freedom was introduced in order to resolve the conflict between Kant and Reinhold, but it raises new questions concerning how one might “freely” acquire material freedom.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Practical Philosophy from Kant to HegelFreedom, Right, and Revolution, pp. 118 - 137Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
- 2
- Cited by