學術產出-學位論文
文章檢視/開啟
書目匯出
-
題名 康德法權論在其道德哲學中之定位
The Status of Kant’s Rechtslehre in His Moral Philosophy作者 王冠龍
Wang, Kuan Lung貢獻者 林遠澤
Lin, Yuan Tse
王冠龍
Wang, Kuan Lung關鍵詞 康德
法權論
道德形上學
實踐哲學
Kant
Doctrine of Right
Metaphysics of Morals
Practical Philosophy日期 2016 上傳時間 2-八月-2016 17:53:12 (UTC+8) 摘要 做為康德道德哲學最後一本主要的著作，《道德底形上學》一書長期以來一直受到康德研究者們的忽視。許多論者們認為，〈法權論〉做為《道德底形上學》一書中的第一部份，其中的許多觀點與康德道德哲學中的理念並不一致。然而，在本論文中，筆者即試圖捍衛〈法權論〉的道德地位，以及《道德底形上學》一書的重要性。是故，本論文有兩個主要的論點：第一，康德的〈法權論〉並不會與其道德哲學理念產生衝突，相對的，法權的法則必須由定言令式演繹而來，而法權的系統本身也未違反自律的原則；第二，《道德底形上學》一書扮演了「道德義務學」及「道德實踐學」的角色，從而與《道德底形上學之基礎》及《實踐理性批判》共同構成康德道德哲學系統中不可或缺的重要部份。
As the last major work of Kant’s morality, the Metaphysics of Morals has long been neglected in Kantian literatures. Many Scholars argue that the Rechtslehre, or Doctrine of Right, as the first part of Metaphysics of Morals, is not consistent with Kant’s moral theory. This research intends to defend the moral status of Rechtslehre and the importance of Metaphysics of Morals in Kant’s moral philosophy. There are two main arguments - firstly, Rechtslehre does not conflict with Kant’s moral theory; instead, the laws of Right should be derived from categorical imperative, and the system of Right does not contradict to the principle of autonomy. Secondly, the Metaphysics of Morals can be regarded as the “doctrine of moral duties” and the “doctrine of practical morality”, and, together with the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and the Critique of Practical Reason, constitutes an essential part in Kant’s moral philosophy.參考文獻 壹、 中文部份Kant, Immanuel著，李明輝譯，《道德底形上學之基礎》，台北：聯經出版社，1990年。———，《一切能作為學問而出現的未來形上學之序論》，台北：聯經出版社，2008年。———，《康德歷史哲學論文集》，台北：聯經出版社，2013年。———，《道德底形上學》，台北：聯經出版社，2015年。Kant, Immanuel著，鄧曉芒譯，楊祖陶校訂，《純粹理性批判》，台北：聯經，2004年。———，《實踐理性批判》，台北：聯經，2004年。貳、 英文部份Allison, H. E. Kant`s Theory of Freedom. Cambridge University Press, 1990.Anderson, P. S., and J. Bell. Kant and Theology. New York: T&T Clark International, 2010.Browne, S. S. S. "Right Acts and Moral Actions." The Journal of Philosophy 42 (1945): 505-515.Cassirer, Ernst. Kant`s Life and Thought. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981.Feinberg, Joel. "Voluntary Euthanasia and the Inalienable Right to Life." Philosophy and Public Affairs 7, no. 2 (1978): 93-123.Flikschuh, Katrin. "Kant`s Indemonstrable Postulate of Right: A Response to Paul Guyer." Kantian Review 12 (2007): 1-39.———. "Justice without Virtue." In Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide, ed. by Lara Denis, 51-70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.Gregor, Mary J. "Laws of Freedom: A Study of Kant`s Method of Applying the Categorical Imperative in the Metaphysik Der Sitten." The Philosophical Review 65 (1963): 223.Guyer, Paul. Kant on Freedom, Law, and Happiness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.———. "Kant`s Deductions of the Principles of Right." In Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: Interpretative Essays, ed. by Mark Timmons, 23-64. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.Höffe, Otfried. "Kant’s Principle of Justice as Categorical Imperative of Law." In Kant’s Practical Philosophy Reconsidered, ed. by Yirmiyahu Yovel, 149-167. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989.———. Immanuel Kant. State University of New York Press, 1994.Hardwig, John. "Action from Duty but Not in Accord with Duty." Ethics 93 (1983): 283-290.Kant, Immanuel. Philosophical Correspondence, 1759-99. ed. and trans. by Arnulf Zweig. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967.———. On History. ed. and trans. by Lewis White Beck. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Educational Publishing, 1977.———. "Perpetual Peace, and Other Essays on Politics, History, and Morals." Trans. by Ted Humphrey. 162. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co., 1983.———. Kant: Political Writings. Trans. by H. S. Nisbet. ed. by Hans Reiss Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.———. The Metaphysics of Morals. ed. and trans. by Mary Greory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.———. Critique of Practical Reason. ed. and trans. by Mary Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.———. Critique of Pure Reason. Trans. by Paul Guyer and Allen Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.———. Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics: That Will Be Able to Come Forward as Science: With Selections from the Critique of Pure Reason. ed. and trans. by Gary C. Hatfield. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.———. Religion and Rational Theology. ed. by Allen Wood and George Di Giovanni Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.———. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. ed. and trans. by Mary Gregor and Jens Timmermann. Revised Edition ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.Kuehn, Manfred. Kant: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.———. "Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: The History and Significance of Its Deferral." In Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide, ed. by Lara Denis, 9-27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.Mulholland, Leslie A. Kant`s System of Rights. New York: Columbia University Press, 1990.Murphy, Jeffrie G. Kant: The Philosophy of Right. New York: St. Martin`s Press, 1970.Nance, Michael. "Discussion Kantian Right and the Categorical Imperative: Response to Willaschek." International Journal of Philosophical Studies 20 (2012): 541-556.Paton, H J. The Categorical Imperative: A Study in Kant`s Moral Philosophy. Chicago: University of Pennsylvania Press, Incorporated, 1971.Potter, Nelson. "Applying the Categorical Imperative in Kant`s Rechtslehre." Jahrbuch fuer Recht und Ethik 11 (2003): 37-51.Riley, Patrick. Kant`s Political Philosophy. Totowa, N.J: Rowman and Littlefield, 1983.Ripstein, Arthur. "Kant on Law and Justice." In The Blackwell Guide to Kant`s Ethics, ed. by Jr. Thomas E. Hill, 159-178. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.———. "A Postulate Incapable of Further Proof." In Force and Freedom: Kant`s Legal and Political Philosophy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2009.———. "Kant and the Circumstances of Justice." In Kant`s Political Theory: Interpretations and Applications, ed. by Elisabeth Ellis, 42-73: Penn State University Press, 2012.Seel, Gerhard. "How Does Kant Justify the Universal Objective Validity of the Law of Right?". International Journal of Philosophical Studies 17 (2009): 71-94.Taylor, Robert S. "Kant`s Political Religion: The Transparency of Perpetual Peace and the Highest Good." The Review of Politics 72 (2010): 1.Wellman, Carl. Real Rights. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.Wellman, Christopher Heath. "On Conflicts between Rights." Law and philosophy 14, no. 3 (1995): 271-295.Willaschek, Marcus. "Why the Doctrine of Right Does Not Belong in the Metaphysics of Morals." Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik 5 (1997): 205-227.———. "Which Imperatives for Right? On the Non-Prescriptive Character of Juridical Laws." In Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: Interpretative Essays, ed. by Mark Timmons, 65-88. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.———. "Right and Coercion: Can Kant`s Conception of Right Be Derived from His Moral Theory?". International Journal of Philosophical Studies 17 (2009): 49-70.———. "The Non-Derivability of Kantian Right from the Categorical Imperative: A Response to Nance." International Journal of Philosophical Studies 20 (2012): 557-564.Williams, Howard. Essays on Kant`s Political Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.Wood, Allen. Kant`s Ethical Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.———. "Kant’s Doctrine of Right: Introduction." In Immanuel Kant. Metaphysische Anfangsgründe Der Rechtslehre., ed. by O. Höffe, 19-40. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1999.———. "The Final Form of Kant`s Practical Philosophy." In Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: Interpretative Essays, ed. by Mark Timmons, 1-21. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.———. Kantian Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.———. Kant`s Moral Religion. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2009. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
哲學系
101154003資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101154003 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 林遠澤 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Lin, Yuan Tse en_US dc.contributor.author (作者) 王冠龍 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (作者) Wang, Kuan Lung en_US dc.creator (作者) 王冠龍 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Wang, Kuan Lung en_US dc.date (日期) 2016 en_US dc.date.accessioned 2-八月-2016 17:53:12 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 2-八月-2016 17:53:12 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-八月-2016 17:53:12 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0101154003 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/99591 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 哲學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 101154003 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 做為康德道德哲學最後一本主要的著作，《道德底形上學》一書長期以來一直受到康德研究者們的忽視。許多論者們認為，〈法權論〉做為《道德底形上學》一書中的第一部份，其中的許多觀點與康德道德哲學中的理念並不一致。然而，在本論文中，筆者即試圖捍衛〈法權論〉的道德地位，以及《道德底形上學》一書的重要性。是故，本論文有兩個主要的論點：第一，康德的〈法權論〉並不會與其道德哲學理念產生衝突，相對的，法權的法則必須由定言令式演繹而來，而法權的系統本身也未違反自律的原則；第二，《道德底形上學》一書扮演了「道德義務學」及「道德實踐學」的角色，從而與《道德底形上學之基礎》及《實踐理性批判》共同構成康德道德哲學系統中不可或缺的重要部份。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) As the last major work of Kant’s morality, the Metaphysics of Morals has long been neglected in Kantian literatures. Many Scholars argue that the Rechtslehre, or Doctrine of Right, as the first part of Metaphysics of Morals, is not consistent with Kant’s moral theory. This research intends to defend the moral status of Rechtslehre and the importance of Metaphysics of Morals in Kant’s moral philosophy. There are two main arguments - firstly, Rechtslehre does not conflict with Kant’s moral theory; instead, the laws of Right should be derived from categorical imperative, and the system of Right does not contradict to the principle of autonomy. Secondly, the Metaphysics of Morals can be regarded as the “doctrine of moral duties” and the “doctrine of practical morality”, and, together with the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and the Critique of Practical Reason, constitutes an essential part in Kant’s moral philosophy. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 摘要 iAbstract ii謝辭 iii康德著作縮寫表 vii目錄 viii第一章：導論 1壹、 研究目的 1貳、 概念的準備工作：〈道德形上學之導論〉及〈法權論導論〉 3一、 道德形上學做為一先驗之學說 3（一） 自然學說與道德學說之區別：一道德形上學之必要性 3（二） 道德形上學之預備概念 41. 自由與法則 42. 人類心靈能力之特殊性：法則到義務的過渡 63. 道德歸責之問題：人與物之區別 8（三） 道德形上學體系之劃分 9二、 法權論導論 13（一） 綜論：Recht一字的雙重意涵 13（二） 法權與法權論 15（三） 法權的普遍原則與法則 17（四） 嚴格法權：法權與強制力 19參、 問題意識的釐清 22一、 文獻探討：從1997迄今的一系列論辯 22二、 字詞的釐清：倫理與道德 23三、 法權論「獨立說」與「依賴說」的判分 24（一） Wood的理論做為一種「獨立說」 24（二） Willaschek的理論做為一種「獨立說」 26（三） Seel的理論做為一種「依賴說」 28（四） Nance的理論做為一種「依賴說」 28（五） Guyer、Flikschuh與Ripstein的理論做為一種「依賴說」 30肆、 研究步驟 31第二章：法權論的「獨立說」及其問題 33壹、 Allen Wood的「完全獨立說」 33一、 Wood的基本論點 34（一） 倫理義務與法學義務的區別 34（二） 對法權的保障不依賴於人的道德性 37（三） 法權原則做為一分析性命題 40（四） 「獨立說」帶來的好處 42（五） 小結 43二、 對Wood的回應 43（一） Guyer：分析命題與設準 44（二） 來自《道德底形上學》架構的質疑 48（三） 採取「好處說」的問題 49貳、 Marcus Willaschek的「二元觀點獨立說」 51一、 Willaschek的基本主張 51（一） 衝突法權的不可能性 52（二） 法權與強制力的非規定性 55（三） 詮釋康德法權論的「二元觀點」 58（四） 道德性與合法性：從「觀點的區別」到「法則的區別」 60（五） 小結 63二、 對Willaschek的回應 64（一） 衝突法權的問題 64（二） 法權與強制力的動態模型 68（三） 二元觀點的轉折點 70參、 總結 73第三章：法權論的「依賴說」及其商榷 74壹、 Gerhard Seel的「定言令式依賴說」及其問題 74一、 法權法則得由定言令式證成 74二、 法權法則只能由定言令式證成 76三、 Seel的「定言令式」依賴說的問題 78（一） 可普遍化與否與普遍法則的程式方法 79（二） 定言令式做為法權的正當性基礎 80貳、 「自由法則依賴說」及其問題 80一、 法權原則無法直接由定言令式演繹而來 81（一） Guyer：法權原則完全不關注行動之格律 82（二） Ripstein：定言令式與法權的普遍原則不同的「不相容性特質」 84（三） Flikschuh：定言令式與法權的普遍原則具有不同的自由概念 86二、 法權原則建立在自由的理念之上 89（一） Flikschuh：「自律的自由」與「非自律的自由」 89（二） Ripstein：法權的自由做為一種「獨立的自由」 91三、 對於「自由法則依賴說」的回應 94（一） 道德法則、自由理念與定言令式 941. 道德法則與定言令式 952. 道德法則即自由法則 96（二） 「定言令式」與「格律」 98參、 Michael Nance的「間接依賴說」 101一、 人做為目的自身的人性尊嚴 102二、 對於外在自由的保障只能訴諸外在強制力 103三、 外在強制力只能用來保障外在自由 104四、 小結：Nance與Willaschek論證之比較 106第四章：對獨立說與依賴說批判之綜合 109壹、 法學立法中「客觀法則」與「主觀動機」之區別 110貳、 「法則」做為法學立法中客觀正當性的來源：法權論與定言令式 112一、 法權法則與倫理法則的共同正當性根源：理性的實踐法則 113二、 法權法則的客觀正當性問題：必須建立在定言令式之上 115參、 「動機」做為法學立法中主觀遵從性的角色：法權論與自律原則 118一、 康德道德哲學中自律的理念 119二、 法權論如何做為一自律的學說 121肆、 小結：重新回歸「懲罰權」的問題 126伍、 總結 128第五章：〈法權論〉及《道德底形上學》的貢獻 130壹、 康德道德哲學三大著作的角色 130一、 《道德底形上學之基礎》：道德原理學、道德自律學 130（一） 《道德底形上學之基礎》做為一道德自律學 130（二） 《道德底形上學之基礎》做為一道德原理學 132二、 《實踐理性批判》：道德神學、道德目的論 134（一） 《實踐理性批判》做為一道德神學 134（二） 《實踐理性批判》做為一道德目的論 137三、 《道德形上學》：道德義務學、道德實踐學 138（一） 《道德底形上學》做為一「道德義務學」 139（二） 《道德底形上學》做為一「道德實踐學」 142貳、 結論 145一、 橫的剖析：康德對於理性的兩個實踐興趣之回答 146二、 縱的演遞：愈發「實踐」的道德哲學 147三、 論文總結：法權論與《道德底形上學》之重要性 149參考文獻 151 zh_TW dc.format.extent 1739183 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101154003 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 康德 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 法權論 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 道德形上學 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 實踐哲學 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Kant en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Doctrine of Right en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Metaphysics of Morals en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Practical Philosophy en_US dc.title (題名) 康德法權論在其道德哲學中之定位 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The Status of Kant’s Rechtslehre in His Moral Philosophy en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 壹、 中文部份Kant, Immanuel著，李明輝譯，《道德底形上學之基礎》，台北：聯經出版社，1990年。———，《一切能作為學問而出現的未來形上學之序論》，台北：聯經出版社，2008年。———，《康德歷史哲學論文集》，台北：聯經出版社，2013年。———，《道德底形上學》，台北：聯經出版社，2015年。Kant, Immanuel著，鄧曉芒譯，楊祖陶校訂，《純粹理性批判》，台北：聯經，2004年。———，《實踐理性批判》，台北：聯經，2004年。貳、 英文部份Allison, H. E. Kant`s Theory of Freedom. Cambridge University Press, 1990.Anderson, P. S., and J. Bell. Kant and Theology. New York: T&T Clark International, 2010.Browne, S. S. S. "Right Acts and Moral Actions." The Journal of Philosophy 42 (1945): 505-515.Cassirer, Ernst. Kant`s Life and Thought. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981.Feinberg, Joel. "Voluntary Euthanasia and the Inalienable Right to Life." Philosophy and Public Affairs 7, no. 2 (1978): 93-123.Flikschuh, Katrin. "Kant`s Indemonstrable Postulate of Right: A Response to Paul Guyer." Kantian Review 12 (2007): 1-39.———. "Justice without Virtue." In Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide, ed. by Lara Denis, 51-70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.Gregor, Mary J. "Laws of Freedom: A Study of Kant`s Method of Applying the Categorical Imperative in the Metaphysik Der Sitten." The Philosophical Review 65 (1963): 223.Guyer, Paul. Kant on Freedom, Law, and Happiness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.———. "Kant`s Deductions of the Principles of Right." In Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: Interpretative Essays, ed. by Mark Timmons, 23-64. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.Höffe, Otfried. "Kant’s Principle of Justice as Categorical Imperative of Law." In Kant’s Practical Philosophy Reconsidered, ed. by Yirmiyahu Yovel, 149-167. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989.———. Immanuel Kant. State University of New York Press, 1994.Hardwig, John. "Action from Duty but Not in Accord with Duty." Ethics 93 (1983): 283-290.Kant, Immanuel. Philosophical Correspondence, 1759-99. ed. and trans. by Arnulf Zweig. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967.———. On History. ed. and trans. by Lewis White Beck. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Educational Publishing, 1977.———. "Perpetual Peace, and Other Essays on Politics, History, and Morals." Trans. by Ted Humphrey. 162. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co., 1983.———. Kant: Political Writings. Trans. by H. S. Nisbet. ed. by Hans Reiss Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.———. The Metaphysics of Morals. ed. and trans. by Mary Greory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.———. Critique of Practical Reason. ed. and trans. by Mary Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.———. Critique of Pure Reason. Trans. by Paul Guyer and Allen Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.———. Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics: That Will Be Able to Come Forward as Science: With Selections from the Critique of Pure Reason. ed. and trans. by Gary C. Hatfield. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.———. Religion and Rational Theology. ed. by Allen Wood and George Di Giovanni Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.———. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. ed. and trans. by Mary Gregor and Jens Timmermann. Revised Edition ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.Kuehn, Manfred. Kant: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.———. "Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: The History and Significance of Its Deferral." In Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide, ed. by Lara Denis, 9-27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.Mulholland, Leslie A. Kant`s System of Rights. New York: Columbia University Press, 1990.Murphy, Jeffrie G. Kant: The Philosophy of Right. New York: St. Martin`s Press, 1970.Nance, Michael. "Discussion Kantian Right and the Categorical Imperative: Response to Willaschek." International Journal of Philosophical Studies 20 (2012): 541-556.Paton, H J. The Categorical Imperative: A Study in Kant`s Moral Philosophy. Chicago: University of Pennsylvania Press, Incorporated, 1971.Potter, Nelson. "Applying the Categorical Imperative in Kant`s Rechtslehre." Jahrbuch fuer Recht und Ethik 11 (2003): 37-51.Riley, Patrick. Kant`s Political Philosophy. Totowa, N.J: Rowman and Littlefield, 1983.Ripstein, Arthur. "Kant on Law and Justice." In The Blackwell Guide to Kant`s Ethics, ed. by Jr. Thomas E. Hill, 159-178. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.———. "A Postulate Incapable of Further Proof." In Force and Freedom: Kant`s Legal and Political Philosophy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2009.———. "Kant and the Circumstances of Justice." In Kant`s Political Theory: Interpretations and Applications, ed. by Elisabeth Ellis, 42-73: Penn State University Press, 2012.Seel, Gerhard. "How Does Kant Justify the Universal Objective Validity of the Law of Right?". International Journal of Philosophical Studies 17 (2009): 71-94.Taylor, Robert S. "Kant`s Political Religion: The Transparency of Perpetual Peace and the Highest Good." The Review of Politics 72 (2010): 1.Wellman, Carl. Real Rights. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.Wellman, Christopher Heath. "On Conflicts between Rights." Law and philosophy 14, no. 3 (1995): 271-295.Willaschek, Marcus. "Why the Doctrine of Right Does Not Belong in the Metaphysics of Morals." Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik 5 (1997): 205-227.———. "Which Imperatives for Right? On the Non-Prescriptive Character of Juridical Laws." In Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: Interpretative Essays, ed. by Mark Timmons, 65-88. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.———. "Right and Coercion: Can Kant`s Conception of Right Be Derived from His Moral Theory?". International Journal of Philosophical Studies 17 (2009): 49-70.———. "The Non-Derivability of Kantian Right from the Categorical Imperative: A Response to Nance." International Journal of Philosophical Studies 20 (2012): 557-564.Williams, Howard. Essays on Kant`s Political Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.Wood, Allen. Kant`s Ethical Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.———. "Kant’s Doctrine of Right: Introduction." In Immanuel Kant. Metaphysische Anfangsgründe Der Rechtslehre., ed. by O. Höffe, 19-40. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1999.———. "The Final Form of Kant`s Practical Philosophy." In Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: Interpretative Essays, ed. by Mark Timmons, 1-21. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.———. Kantian Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.———. Kant`s Moral Religion. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2009. zh_TW
