more upon practical issues and leads to the notion of good will which Kant explains at the outset of Section I in Groundwork: It is impossible to think of anything at all in the world, or indeed even beyond it, that could be considered good without limitation except a good will (Gr. 4:393) Good will includes several features: it is neither merely designed to make us happy, nor does it rely on the consequences of an act or unconditional good. While we may doubt the solidity of Kant’s theory as a
may realize that in accordance with causal law he will ultimately face the effect of his theft, only via a normative determination will he experience practical freedom. In this Critique, Kant’s main purpose is not to draw the reader’s attention to actual moral experience, and the First Critique does not actually explain the moral philosophy. Kant’s ultimate aim is to demonstrate how metaphysics could be possible; in doing this, he constructs his transcendental philosophy. It seems Kant does not want
Allan Wood’s article in Mark Timmons’s volume Kant's Metaphysics of Morals: Interpretative Essays; Woods presents a thoughtful interpretation that might be a clue for our discussion of emptiness charge. By examining each of the two major doctrines of Metaphysics of Morals, that is, principle of right and the class of juridical (or coercively enforceable) duties, Woods argues it will help us more clearly understand Kant’s implication. Wood claims, Kant’s admirers, in fact, as well as his critics tend