Book contents
- Moral Education in the 21st Century
- Moral Education in the 21st Century
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Chapter 1 Why Does Moral Education Matter in the 21st Century?
- Part I Historical Insights for Contemporary Moral Education
- Chapter 2 Plato’s Significance for Moral Education
- Chapter 3 Neo-Aristotelianism and Moral Education
- Chapter 4 Neoskepticism and Moral Education
- Chapter 5 Nietzsche and Moral Education
- Chapter 6 Neo-Kantianism and Moral Education
- Part II New Approaches to Moral Education
- Part III Responses to Contemporary Moral Problems
- Index
- References
Chapter 6 - Neo-Kantianism and Moral Education
from Part I - Historical Insights for Contemporary Moral Education
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 June 2023
Book contents
- Moral Education in the 21st Century
- Moral Education in the 21st Century
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Chapter 1 Why Does Moral Education Matter in the 21st Century?
- Part I Historical Insights for Contemporary Moral Education
- Chapter 2 Plato’s Significance for Moral Education
- Chapter 3 Neo-Aristotelianism and Moral Education
- Chapter 4 Neoskepticism and Moral Education
- Chapter 5 Nietzsche and Moral Education
- Chapter 6 Neo-Kantianism and Moral Education
- Part II New Approaches to Moral Education
- Part III Responses to Contemporary Moral Problems
- Index
- References
Summary
Kant’s contribution to moral education is deep, wide, and operates at several levels, including moral theory, the theory of judgment (both theoretical and moral), ethics and politics, anthropology, and culture. Kant’s pedagogy runs through his “system,” including the three Critiques but also his articles and books detailing empirical concerns, such as, for example, his Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View. The scholarship on Kant’s notion of education is equally broad and discusses each and all these themes. A taste of the range of scholarship is provided to the reader who is unfamiliar with the literature on Kant’s pedagogy and the role of it in his theoretical, moral, ethical-political, and cultural accounts. This will extend from a broad introduction of the scholarship to specific scholars and their respective accounts. Finally, five questions bearing on Kant’s account of education and its relationship to his other works and for present circumstances are drawn as indications for future scholarly directions.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Moral Education in the 21st Century , pp. 94 - 112Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Beiser, F. (2009). The genesis of Neo-Kantianism (1796–1880). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Formosa, P. (2012). From discipline to autonomy: Kant’s theory of moral development. In Roth, K. & Surprenant, C. (Eds), Kant and education: Interpretations and commentary (pp. 163–176.) New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Geisinger, J. (2010). Kant’s account of moral education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(4), 775–786.Google Scholar
Herman, B. (1993). The practice of moral judgment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Herman, B. (2007a). Can virtue be taught? The problem of new moral facts. In Herman, B. (Ed.), Moral literacy (pp. 106–129). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Herman, B. (2007b). Training to autonomy: Kant and the question of moral education. In Herman, B. (Ed.), Moral literacy (pp. 130–153). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, D. (1777). Of the standard of taste. In Hume, D. (Ed.), Essays, moral, political, and literary. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. (2006). The education of the categorical imperative Studies in the Philosophy of Education, 25, 385–402.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. (2008). Moral law and moral education: Defending Kantian autonomy. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 41(2), 233–245.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. (2009). Prioritizing rights in the social justice curriculum. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 28, 119–133.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. (2012). Kant as moral psychologist? In Roth, K. & Surprenant, C. (Eds.), Kant and education: Interpretations and commentary (pp. 177–192). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. (2013). Kant’s philosophy: A study for educators. London: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. (2019). Kant and prejudice, or the mechanical use of reason. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 51(3), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. (1992a). The Vienna logic. In Young, M. (Ed.), The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Lectures on logic (pp. 249–378). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1992b). The Jäsche logic. In Young, M. (Ed.), The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Lectures on logic (pp. 521–564). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1996a). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. In Gregor, M. (Ed.), The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Practical philosophy, 4 (pp. 37–108). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1996b). Critique of practical reason. In Gregor, M. (Ed.), The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Practical philosophy, 5 (pp. 133–271). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. (1996c). Metaphysics of morals. In Gregor, M. (Ed.), The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Practical philosophy, 6 (pp. 353–504). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. (1996d). On the common saying, that may be correct in theory, but is of no use in practice. In Gregor, M. (Ed.), The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Practical philosophy, 8 (pp. 273–310). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1996e). An answer to the question: What is Enlightenment? In Gregor, M. (Ed.), The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Practical philosophy, 8 (pp. 11–22). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. (2000). Critique of the power of judgment, 5. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (2007a). Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view. In Louden, R. B. & Zöller, G. (Eds.), The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Anthropology, history, and education, 7. (pp. 227–429). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (2007b). Letters on the Philanthropinum. In Louden, R. B. & Zöller, G. (Eds.), The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Anthropology, history, and education, 2 (pp. 100–102). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (2007c). Lectures on pedagogy. In Louden, R. B. & Zöller, G. (Eds.), The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Anthropology, history, and education, 9 (pp. 434–485). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Louden, R. (2000). Kant’s impure ethics: From rational beings to human beings. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louden, R. (2016). Total transformation: Why Kant did not give up on education. Kantian Review, 21(3), 393–413.Google Scholar
Løvlie, L. (2011). Understanding agency and educating character. Educational Theory, 61(3), 257–274.Google Scholar
Lyotard, F. (1979). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. G. Bennington & B. Massumi (trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Makreel, R., & Luft, S. (Eds.), (2009). Neo-Kantianism in contemporary philosophy. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Meld Shell, S. (2012). Kant on the humanities. In Roth, K. & Surprenant, C. (Eds.), Kant and education: Interpretations and commentary (pp. 193–213). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Moran, K. (2009) Can Kant have an account of moral education? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 43(4), 471–494.Google Scholar
Moran, K. (2012). Community and progress in Kant’s moral philosophy. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munzel, F. (1999) Kant’s conception of moral character: The “critical” link of morality, anthropology, and reflective judgment. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Munzel, F. (2003). Kant on moral education, or “enlightenment” and the liberal arts. Review of Metaphysics, 57(1), 43–73.Google Scholar
Munzel, F. (2013) Kant’s conception of pedagogy: Toward education for freedom. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Okshevsky, W. (2000). Kant’s catechism for moral education: From particularity through universality to morality. Philosophy of Education, 94–102.Google Scholar
Pleines, J.-E. (1985). Kant und die Pädagogik: Pädagogik und Praktischen Philosophie. Würtburg, Germany: Konighausen und Neumann.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (2000). Lectures on the history of moral philosophy. Herman, B. (Ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Surprenant, C. (2010). Kant’s contribution to moral education: The relevance of catechistic. Journal of Moral Education, 39(2), 165–174.Google Scholar
Surprenant, C. (2012). Kant’s contribution to moral education. In Roth, K. & Surprenant, C. (Eds.), Kant and education: Interpretations and commentary (pp. 1–11). New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Weiskopff, T. (1971). Kant und die Pädagogik: Beiträge zu einer Monographie. Zürich, Switzerland: EZ Verlag.Google Scholar