Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    The universal law formula is not derived from the princip... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The universal law formula is not derived from the principle of non-contradiction.

    Modality & Possibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If the universal law formula were derived from the principle of non-contradiction, then the Categorical Imperative would be a logical truth.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kant insists that the Categorical Imperative is not a logical truth (or at least not analytic).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's universalizability test functions by exposing performative contradictions, not merely logical contradictions in the formal sense.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Christine Korsgaard argues that practical contradictions—where a maxim defeats itself when universalized—are a species of contradiction Kant explicitly invokes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If contradiction is understood broadly to include practical self-defeat, the ULF can be grounded in contradiction without reducing the CI to an analytic logical truth.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Leibniz and Wolff grounded moral principles in the principle of sufficient reason and non-contradiction, and Kant explicitly trained in this rationalist tradition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dieter Henrich has shown that Kant's early pre-critical ethics derived moral duties from the logical structure of rational willing, making contradiction central.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The residual rationalist scaffolding in the Groundwork suggests the ULF retains a structural dependence on contradiction even if Kant later disavowed purely analytic grounding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageModality & Possibility

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge2 linked

    Related

    Christine Korsgaard argues that practical contradictions—where a maxim defeats i...Dieter Henrich has shown that Kant's early pre-critical ethics derived moral dut...If contradiction is understood broadly to include practical self-defeat, the ULF...If the universal law formula were derived from the principle of non-contradictio...
    +4 moreShow less
    Kant insists that the Categorical Imperative is not a logical truth (or at least...Kant's universalizability test functions by exposing performative contradictions...Leibniz and Wolff grounded moral principles in the principle of sufficient reaso...The residual rationalist scaffolding in the Groundwork suggests the ULF retains ...

    Similar

    If the universal law formula were derived from the principle of non-co...93%The principle of non-contradiction is universally valid for everything...81%Damian's position does not require him to deny the universal validity ...79%Some real possibilities and impossibilities are not grounded in the pr...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: kant-moral
    View source passageHide passage
    Perhaps, then, if the formulas are not equivalent in meaning, they are nevertheless logically interderivable and hence equivalent in this sense. The universal law formula is not itself derived, as some of Kant’s interpreters have suggested, from the principle of non-contradiction. That would have the consequence that the CI is a logical truth, and Kant insists that it is not or at least that it is not analytic. Since the CI formulas are not logical truths, then, it is possible that they could be
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit