The Concept of “Agency” in Contemporary Research of Moral Normativity

Studies in Ethics ›› 2025 (3): 38-46.

Previous Articles Next Articles

The Concept of “Agency” in Contemporary Research of Moral Normativity

Li Yaming

Online:2025-05-10 Published:2025-06-06

当代道德规范性研究中的“行动性”概念

李亚明

作者简介:李亚明,中国社会科学院哲学研究所研究员。
基金资助:
本文系中国社会科学院研究所创新工程研究类项目“中国式现代化进程中的前沿伦理问题研究”（2024ZXCX03）的阶段性成果

Abstract

摘要： 在当代道德规范性研究中,行动性概念得到了最为集中、深入的探讨。各种规范性论证均建构了独特的行动性概念。正是这些不同的行动性概念,在根本上塑造了对道德规范性的不同论证方案。持有相同行动性概念的一类理论,在规范性的论证上体现出相同优势,也面临相似的困难。因此,通过反思每一类理论对道德规范性的论证是否充分,可以反推该类论证对于行动性的理解是否合理。如果道德具有规范性,无论将行动性理解为实现主观目的的能力,还是实现客观目的能力,都将在公共理由的论证上面临相同的困境。将行动性阐释为认可特定的人际关系并据此行动的能力,则能够有效避免这些理论困难,使道德原则和行动理由间的关系得到更充分的说明。

关键词: 行动性, 规范性, 道德地位, 道德理由

Li Yaming. The Concept of “Agency” in Contemporary Research of Moral Normativity[J]. Studies in Ethics, 2025(3): 38-46.

李亚明. 当代道德规范性研究中的“行动性”概念[J]. 伦理学研究, 2025(3): 38-46.

References

[1] DARWALL S.Making the“Hard”Problem of Moral Normativity Easier[M]//Weighing Reasons. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2016.
[2] DARWALL S. Internalism and Agency[J].Philosophical Perspectives,1992(6).
[3] RAILTON P.Moral Realism[J].The Philosophical Review,1986,95(2).
[4] KORSGAARD C.Self-Constitution: Agency,Identity,and Integrity[M].Oxford: Oxford University Press,2009.
[5] GEWIRTH A.Reason and Morality[M].Chicago,IL: The University of Chicago Press,1978.
[6] KORGAARD C.The Sources of Normativity[M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1996.
[7] WONG D.Constructing Normative Objectivity in Ethics[J].Social Philosophy and Policy,2008,25(1).
[8] KANT I.Mary Gregor and Timmermann (ed. & transl.). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals[M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2011.
[9] KORSGAARD C.The Normative Constitution of Agency[M]//Rational and Social Agency: The Philosophy of Michael Bratman. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2014.
[10] WILLIAMS B.Moral Luck[M].Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1982.
[11] KORSGAARD C. Creating the Kingdom of Ends: Reciprocity and Responsibility in Personal Relations[J].Philosophical Perspectives,1992(6).
[12] KORSGAARD C.From Duty and for the Sake of the Noble: Kant and Aristotle on Morally Good Action[M]//Kant on Emotion and Value. London:Palgrave Macmillan,2014.
[13] KANT I. Mary J.Gregor(transl. & ed.). Practical Philosophy[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1999.
[14] SCANLON T.Moral Dimensions: Permissibility,Meaning,Blame[M].Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press,2008.
[15] DARWALL S. Moore,Normativity,andIntrinsic Value[J].Ethics,2003,113(3).
[16] 文贤庆. 康德的道德规范性理论探析[J].伦理学研究,2022(4).
[17] DARWALL S.Agent-Centered Restrictions from the Inside Out[J].Philosophical Studies,1986,50.
[18] DARWALL S.The Second-Person Standpoint:Morality,Respect and Accountability[M].Cambridge,Mass: Harvard University Press,2006.
[19] WILLIAMS B.Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy[M].Abingdon: Routledge,2006.
[20] PARFIT D. On What Matters,Volume One[M].Oxford: Oxford University Press,2011.
[21] SCANLON T.What We Owe to Each Other[M].Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1998.
[22] DARWALL S.Law and the Second-Person Standpoint[J].Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review,2006,40(3).
[23] SCANLON T.Being Realistic about Reasons[M].Oxford: Oxford University Press,2014.

The Concept of “Agency” in Contemporary Research of Moral Normativity

当代道德规范性研究中的“行动性”概念

PDF

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 0

Recommended Articles

Metrics