For citation:
Kostritskaya T. A. What is “universal” in the “universal law”? I. Kant’s ethics as a legacy of the androcentric tradition and the foundation of a just community. Izvestiya of Saratov University. Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy, 2026, vol. 26, iss. 2, pp. 135-139. DOI: 10.18500/1819-7671-2026-26-2-135-139, EDN: HWVVER
What is “universal” in the “universal law”? I. Kant’s ethics as a legacy of the androcentric tradition and the foundation of a just community
Introduction. I. Kant is a highly relevant thinker, therefore, a study of his philosophy on the subject of androcentrism is able to highlight the foundations of the modern era ethical contradictions. The purpose of the study is to find out to what extent the involvement of the androcentric tradition determined the ethics of I. Kant and to answer the question of whether it can still serve as the basis for a universal rational theory of a just society. Theoretical analysis. As a result of the analysis of the manifestations of androcentrism in the justification and application of the categorical imperative by Kant it has been discovered that the philosopher reproduces the split of reality into two worlds, as a result of which specific human relationships turn out to be insignificant for the constitution of a community of autonomous individuals. The illusion of their autonomy rests on the exclusion from the community of those on whom they depend for their lives. However, this exception, being fraught with logical contradictions, turned out to be possible because the imperative necessarily implies an implicit ideal of a social structure. Conclusion. The transformation of this ideal is necessary for the development of duty ethics, which is initially aimed at affirming a better reality and achieving its true universality.
- O’Neill O. Justice, Gender and International Boundaries. British Journal of Political Science, 1990, vol. 20, iss. 4. pp. 439–459. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400005937
- Gilligan C. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, MA, London, Harvard University Press, 2003. 184 p.
- Held V. The Ethics of Care: Personal, Political, and Global. New York, Oxford University Press, 2006. 211 p.
- Baron M. Kantian ethics almost without apology. Ithaca, New York, Cornell University Press, 1995. 264 p.
- Stark C. Decision procedures, standards of rightness, and impartiality. Nous, 1997, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 478–495. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2216169
- Bramer M. The importance of personal relationships in Kantian moral theory: A reply to care Ethics. Hypatia, 2010, vol. 25, iss. 1, pp. 121–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1527-2001.2009.01087.X
- Sedgwick S. Can Kant’s Ethics survive the feminist critique? In: Schott R. M., ed. Feminist Interpretations of Immanuel Kant. University Park, Pennsylvania State University Press, 1997, pp. 77–100.
- Kant I. Sobr. soch.: v 8 t. T. 4. Osnovopolozheniya metafiziki nravov [Collected Works: in 8 vols. Vol. 4. Fundamentals of Moral Metaphysics]. Moscow, ChORO, 1994. 629 p. (in Russian).
- Kant I. Sobr. soch.: v 8 t. T. 3. Kritika chistogo razuma [Collected Works: in 8 vols. Vol. 3. Criticism of pure reason]. Moscow, ChORO, 1994. 741 p. (in Russian).
- Varden H. Kant on universality and accommodating differences (religious, racial, sexual, gendered). In: Baiasu S., Timmons M., eds. The Kantian Mind. London, New York, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2024, pp. 387–397.
- Kant I. Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view. In: Soch. v 6 t. [Works: in 6 vols.]. Moscow, Mysl’, 1966, vol. 6, pp. 349–587 (in Russian).
- Kant I. On the Common Saying: That May Be True in Theory, but It Is of No Use in Practice. In: Sobr. soch.: v 8 t. T. 8 [Collected Works: in 8 vols. Vol. 8]. Moscow, ChORO, 1994, pp. 158–204 (in Russian).
- Pateman C. The Sexual Contract. Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1988. 264 p.
- Sun T. Feminist ethics: Reinterpreting Kantian deontology through gender perspectives. International Journal of Religion, 2024, vol. 5, no. 10, pp. 5199–5210. https://doi.org/10.61707/0j319h23