The Duties of Virtue
The Groundwork gave a formula and, critics said, no ethics — so where does the categorical imperative finally get spent on the concrete matter of a good life?
Twelve years after stating the imperative in the abstract, Kant spends it. The Doctrine of Right had covered the duties a state can enforce; virtue covers the ones it cannot, organised around two ends reason makes obligatory — one's own perfection and the happiness of others. From these he works out matter the Groundwork never touched: duties against lying, servility and self-contempt, duties of beneficence, gratitude and respect. His casuistical questions pointedly refuse a rule for every case, and later Kantians recovered the book as proof his ethics was always more than its single most quoted principle.
- ethics
- duty
- virtue
- virtue ethics
- moral obligation
- autonomy
- freedom
- moral motivation
Enter a dialogue
- Critics said your Groundwork gave a formula and no ethics — does spending the imperative on real duties actually answer them?
- Tell me what my own perfection and others' happiness concretely demand — where does the imperative finally get spent?
- Making my own perfection and others' happiness obligatory ends, what comfortable indifference must a person give up?
- How do the duties a state can enforce differ from the duties of virtue no one may compel?