|
|
Moral obligation as sociological fact and theoretical problem: a debate between Bergson and Kant
Palmea, King Reinier ; Ottmann, François (advisor) ; Serban, Claudia (referee)
This work aims to explicate the difference between Bergson and Kant's concept of obligation in light of Bergson's critique of Kant in his book Les Deux Sources de la Morale et Religion (The Two Sources of Morality and Religion). From what perspective does this critique and reading of Kant originate? I argue that it lies in their different approaches to morality. On one hand, Bergson views moral obligation as a sociological and anthropological fact. He applies an existential approach in his moral theory because the anthropological fact he engages with, namely the phenomenon of barbarism during the First World War, provides the framework for his typology of closed and open morality, and his critique of deontology. On the other hand, Kant considers morality as a theoretical problem; morality is a conceptual engagement-an investigation of the concepts that morality presupposes. Their divergent approaches underpin (1) the difference in their conception of freedom in relation to morality and (2) their conception of mysticism as a possible ground for morality. Keywords: obligation, reason, pressure, aspiration, morality, freedom, autonomy, moral creativity, mysticism
|
guest ::
