Moral Equality and Natural Inferiority
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20317239 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Laurence Thomas (Syracuse University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2005 |
| Volume | 31 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 379-404 |
| Publication date | 2005-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Social Theory and Practice (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0037-802X • E-ISSN: 2154-123X |
| Publisher | Philosophy Documentation Center (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.5840/soctheorpract200531315 |
| OpenAlex | W2074094776 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
This essay is a commentary upon "Race and Kant" by Thomas Hill, Jr and Bernard Boxill. They argue that although Kant in his anthropological writings took blacks to be inferior, his moral theory requires that they be shown the proper moral respect since blacks are persons nonetheless. \n\nI argue that this argument is sound, because the conception of inferiority that Kant attributed to blacks does not permit showing them the proper moral respect. Imagine a defective Mercedes Benz and a Ford Pinto. These two cars are not inferior in the same sort of way. For Kant, I argue, the inferiority of blacks is more akin to that of a Ford Pinto; for he undoubtedly took blacks to be perpetual children. Chilren are persons, too; however, no one has ever supposed that moral theory applies to children in the full way that it applies to adults
Applied philosophy · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Geography · Natural (archaeology) · Sociology · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0.12 |
| Citation span | 2009 - 2013 (5) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |