Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Kant’s most prominent formulation of the Categorical Imperative, known as the Formula of Universal Law (FUL), is generally thought to demand that one act only on maxims that one can will as universal laws without this generating a contradiction. Kant’s view is standardly summarized as requiring the ‘universalizability’ of one’s maxims and described in terms of the distinction between ‘contradictions in conception’ and ‘contradictions in the will’. Focusing on the underappreciated significance of the simultaneity condition included in the FUL, I argue, by contrast, that the principle is better read as requiring that one be able to will
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pauline Kleingeld (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: