fundamental principles of the metaphysic of morals-第2章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



morals　themselves；　and　counteracts　its　own　end。

　　Let　it　not　be　thought；　however；　that　what　is　here　demanded　is

already　extant　in　the　propaedeutic　prefixed　by　the　celebrated　Wolf

to　his　moral　philosophy；　namely；　his　so…called　general　practical

philosophy；　and　that；　therefore；　we　have　not　to　strike　into　an

entirely　new　field。　just　because　it　was　to　be　a　general　practical

philosophy；　it　has　not　taken　into　consideration　a　will　of　any

particular　kind…　say　one　which　should　be　determined　solely　from　a

priori　principles　without　any　empirical　motives；　and　which　we　might

call　a　pure　will；　but　volition　in　general；　with　all　the　actions　and

conditions　which　belong　to　it　in　this　general　signification。　By　this

it　is　distinguished　from　a　metaphysic　of　morals；　just　as　general

logic；　which　treats　of　the　acts　and　canons　of　thought　in　general；　is

distinguished　from　transcendental　philosophy；　which　treats　of　the

particular　acts　and　canons　of　pure　thought；　i。e。；　that　whose

cognitions　are　altogether　a　priori。　For　the　metaphysic　of　morals　has

to　examine　the　idea　and　the　principles　of　a　possible　pure　will；　and

not　the　acts　and　conditions　of　human　volition　generally；　which　for　the

most　part　are　drawn　from　psychology。　It　is　true　that　moral　laws　and

duty　are　spoken　of　in　the　general　moral　philosophy　（contrary　indeed　to

all　fitness）。　But　this　is　no　objection；　for　in　this　respect　also　the

authors　of　that　science　remain　true　to　their　idea　of　it；　they　do　not

distinguish　the　motives　which　are　prescribed　as　such　by　reason　alone

altogether　a　priori；　and　which　are　properly　moral；　from　the

empirical　motives　which　the　understanding　raises　to　general

conceptions　merely　by　comparison　of　experiences；　but；　without　noticing

the　difference　of　their　sources；　and　looking　on　them　all　as

homogeneous；　they　consider　only　their　greater　or　less　amount。　It　is　in

this　way　they　frame　their　notion　of　obligation；　which；　though　anything

but　moral；　is　all　that　can　be　attained　in　a　philosophy　which　passes　no

judgement　at　all　on　the　origin　of　all　possible　practical　concepts；

whether　they　are　a　priori；　or　only　a　posteriori。

　　Intending　to　publish　hereafter　a　metaphysic　of　morals；　I　issue　in

the　first　instance　these　fundamental　principles。　Indeed　there　is

properly　no　other　foundation　for　it　than　the　critical　examination　of　a

pure　practical　Reason；　just　as　that　of　metaphysics　is　the　critical

examination　of　the　pure　speculative　reason；　already　published。　But

in　the　first　place　the　former　is　not　so　absolutely　necessary　as　the

latter；　because　in　moral　concerns　human　reason　can　easily　be　brought

to　a　high　degree　of　correctness　and　completeness；　even　in　the

commonest　understanding；　while　on　the　contrary　in　its　theoretic　but

pure　use　it　is　wholly　dialectical；　and　in　the　second　place　if　the

critique　of　a　pure　practical　reason　is　to　be　complete；　it　must　be

possible　at　the　same　time　to　show　its　identity　with　the　speculative

reason　in　a　common　principle；　for　it　can　ultimately　be　only　one　and

the　same　reason　which　has　to　be　distinguished　merely　in　its

application。　I　could　not；　however；　bring　it　to　such　completeness　here；

without　introducing　considerations　of　a　wholly　different　kind；　which

would　be　perplexing　to　the　reader。　On　this　account　I　have　adopted

the　title　of　Fundamental　Principles　of　the　Metaphysic　of　Morals

instead　of　that　of　a　Critical　Examination　of　the　pure　practical

reason。

　　But　in　the　third　place；　since　a　metaphysic　of　morals；　in　spite　of

the　discouraging　title；　is　yet　capable　of　being　presented　in　popular

form；　and　one　adapted　to　the　common　understanding；　I　find　it　useful　to

separate　from　it　this　preliminary　treatise　on　its　fundamental

principles；　in　order　that　I　may　not　hereafter　have　need　to　introduce

these　necessarily　subtle　discussions　into　a　book　of　a　more　simple

character。

　　The　present　treatise　is；　however；　nothing　more　than　the

investigation　and　establishment　of　the　supreme　principle　of

morality；　and　this　alone　constitutes　a　study　complete　in　itself　and

one　which　ought　to　be　kept　apart　from　every　other　moral　investigation。

No　doubt　my　conclusions　on　this　weighty　question；　which　has　hitherto

been　very　unsatisfactorily　examined；　would　receive　much　light　from　the

application　of　the　same　principle　to　the　whole　system；　and　would　be

greatly　confirmed　by　the　adequacy　which　it　exhibits　throughout；　but

I　must　forego　this　advantage；　which　indeed　would　be　after　all　more

gratifying　than　useful；　since　the　easy　applicability　of　a　principle

and　its　apparent　adequacy　give　no　very　certain　proof　of　its　soundness；

but　rather　inspire　a　certain　partiality；　which　prevents　us　from

examining　and　estimating　it　strictly　in　itself　and　without　regard　to

consequences。

　　I　have　adopted　in　this　work　the　method　which　I　think　most

suitable；　proceeding　analytically　from　common　knowledge　to　the

determination　of　its　ultimate　principle；　and　again　descending

synthetically　from　the　examination　of　this　principle　and　its　sources

to　the　common　knowledge　in　which　we　find　it　employed。　The　division

will；　therefore；　be　as　follows：



　　1　FIRST　SECTION。　Transition　from　the　common　rational　knowledge　of

morality　to　the　philosophical。



　　2　SECOND　SECTION。　Transition　from　popular　moral　philosophy　to　the

metaphysic　of　morals。



　　3　THIRD　SECTION。　Final　step　from　the　metaphysic　of　morals　to　the

critique　of　the　pure　practical　reason。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　FIRST　SECTION



　　　　　　　　　TRANSITION　FROM　THE　COMMON　RATIONAL　KNOWLEDGE

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　OF　MORALITY　TO　THE　PHILOSOPHICAL



　　Nothing　can　possibly　be　conceived　in　the　world；　or　even　out　of　it；

which　can　be　called　good；　without　qualification；　except　a　good　will。

Intelligence；　wit；　judgement；　and　the　other　talents　of　the　mind；

however　they　may　be　named；　or　courage；　resolution；　perseverance；　as

qualities　of　temperament；　are　undoubtedly　good　and　desirable　in　many

respects；　but　these　gifts　of　nature　may　also　become　extremely　bad

and　mischievous　if　the　will　which　is　to　make　use　of　them；　and　which；

therefore；　constitutes　what　is　called　character；　is　not　good。　It　is

the　same　with　the　gifts　of　fortune。　Power；　riches；　honour；　even

health；　and　the　general　well…being　and　contentment　with　one's

condition　which　is　called　happiness；　inspire　pride；　and　often

presumption；　if　there　is　not　a　good　will　to　correct　the　influence　of

these　on　the　mind；　and　with　this　also　to　rectify　the　whole　principle

of　acting　and　adapt　it　to　its　end。　The　sight　of　a　being　who　is　not

adorned　with　a　single　feature　of　a　pure　and　good　will；　enjoying

unbroken　prosperity；　can　never　give　pleasure　to　an　impartial

rational　spectator。　Thus　a　good　will　appears　to　constitute　the

indispensable　condition　even　of　being　worthy　of　happiness。

　　There　are　even　some　qualities　which　are　of　service　to　this　good　will

itself　and　may　facilitate　its　action；　yet　which　have　no　intrinsic

unconditional　value；　but　always　presuppose　a　good　will；　and　this

qualifies　the　esteem　that　we　justly　have　for　them　and　does　not

permit　us　to　regard　them　as　absolutely　good。　Moderation　in　the

affections　and　passions；　self…control；　and　calm　deliberation　are　not

only　good　in　many　respects；　but　even　seem　to　constitute　part　of　the

intrinsic　worth　of　the　person；　but　they　are　far　from　deserving　to　be

called　good　without　qualification；　although　they　have　been　so

unconditionally　praised　by　the　ancients。　For　without　the　principles　of

a　good　will；　they　may　become　extremely　bad；　and　the　coolness　of　a

villain　not　only　makes　him　far　more　dangerous；　but　also　directly　makes

him　more　abominable　in　our　eyes　than　he　would　have　been　without　it。

　　A　good　will　is　good　not　because　of　what　it　performs　or　effects；

not　by　its　aptness　for　the　attainment　of　some　proposed　end；　but　simply

by　virtue　of　the　volition；　that　is；　it　is　good　in　itself；　and

considered　by　itself　is　to　be　esteemed　much　higher　than　all　that　can

be　brought　about　by　it　in　favour　of　any　inclination；　nay　even　of　the

sum　total　of　all　inclinations。　Even　if　i