A Study Of Kant’s Theory Of Imputation

Imputation is not only an important activity in human practices,but also an important theme in human thoughts.Kant has done much work in exploring problems regarding imputation,and his thoughts about imputation play a relatively significant part in the history of philosophy.Moreover,Kant"s thoughts about imputation can shed important light to contemporary studies in practical philosophy.Based on a detailed study of Kant"s works related to imputation,this dissertation aims to construct Kant"s theory of imputation,to discuss and respond to the main objections to it,and to explore the significance of this theory.The whole dissertation is divided into five chapters.In the first chapter,I analyze the meaning of “imputation” and discuss two representative theories of imputation before Kant,i.e.,Aristotle"s and Pufendorf"s theory of imputation.This provides the academic and historical background for Kant"s theory of imputation.As is pointed out,two different levels of imputation can be distinguished,the factual level and the normative level.Both moral imputation and legal imputation can be included in the normative level of imputation.According to Aristotle,for an action to be properly imputed,it must be voluntary.Only voluntary actions can be praised or blamed,while involuntary ones are usually forgiven.Similarly,according to Pufendorf,the free choice of the will is the prerequisite of imputation.He holds that only those actions under the agent"s control can be imputed and only those actions the agent are able either to do or to omit are under his control.Moreover,Pufendorf makes it clear that imputation is exercised in human courts based on the natural law,and it is thus only related to external human actions.In the second chapter,I discuss the famous “Imputability Problem” for Kant and explore a new and reasonable solution for it,which is the most important preparatory work for constructing Kant"s theory of imputation.As we see,Kant takes autonomy as true freedom,but many critics point out that this conception of freedom will lead to a serious problem—immoral actions could not be imputed to the agents,which is usually called the “Imputability Problem”.According to the critics,since Kant equates freedom to autonomy,only moral actions are autonomous and free,while immoral actions are heteronomous and not free.Therefore,immoral actions could not be imputed,resulting in the “Imputability Problem” of immoral actions.Scholars have explored solutions to this problem.I sort out these solutions into three types and point out that all of them are problematic in some aspects.Based on this,I provide a new and reasonable solution for the “Imputability Problem” by clarifying the meaning and relation of freedom,autonomy and morality in Kant"s philosophy.For Kant,immoral actions can reasonably be imputed to the agents,because the agents" will is under the moral law,i.e.,the law of freedom,rather than the law of nature.Whether one obeys the moral law or not while acting,his will is always under the moral law and he can never revoke his obedience to it.For this reason,the will of human beings is always autonomous and thus always free,which lays the foundation for the imputation of our actions.Moreover,every action(including immoral ones)is the result of the free choice of will,which provides another reason and justification for the imputation of immoral actions.This being said,although Kant equates freedom to autonomy,he can still maintain that immoral actions can be imputed to the agents.The “Imputability Problem” of immoral actions is thus successfully solved.In the third chapter,I construct Kant"s theory of imputation,which includes the definition of imputation,the distinction between imputable actions and actions that cannot be imputed,the degrees of imputation,and the distinction between moral imputation and legal imputation.As is pointed out,the definition of imputation is the foundation of Kant"s theory of imputaion,and this definition emphasizes that imputation in the moral sense is the judgment by which someone is regarded as the author(causa libera/free cause)of an action,which stands under practical laws at the same time.Based on their relation to practical lasws,actions can be divided into three types,i.e.,actions that is owed,meritorious actions and culpable actions.If what one does is just exactly what the law requires,he does what is owed;if one does more than the law requires,his action is meritorious;if one does less than the law requires,his action is culpable.For Kant,actions that cannot be imputed are what is owed,since these actions can neither be praised nor blamed;by contrast,actions that can be imputed are either meritorious or culpable.As for the degrees of imputation,Kant makes it clear that the measure of natural and moral obstacles one overcomes while acting can make a difference in the imputation of merit or demerit.According to the criterion of actions or the sources of laws or duties,imputation can be divided into moral imputation and legal imputation.Moral imputation concerns the morality of actions,i.e.,it concerns whether the maxim of an action conforms with the moral law.By contrast,legal imputation concerns the legality of actions,i.e.,it concerns whether an action itself conforms with juridical laws.Moral imputation is a kind of internal imputation,while legal imputation is a kind of external imputation.In the fourth chapter,I discuss and respond to two main objections to Kant"s theory of imputation raised by scholars abroad.The first objection is that Kant"s theory of moral imputation leaves no room for supererogatory and meritorious actions,which is a major deficiency of this theory.The response for this objection is as follows: since human beings should obey the moral law from duty and fulfilling imperfect duty cannot be regarded as meritorious,it is true that Kant"s moral imputation leaves no room for supererogatory and meritorious actions.However,this does not constitute a serious problem for Kant"s theory of imputation because what is truly praiseworthy for Kant is what is done from duty,from the respect for the moral law,although such actions do not come up to merit.The second objection is that Kant"s theory of imputation disregards the importance of the consequences of actions in imputation and that his view in a specific case(lying to the murder at the door)is too extreme.For this objection,I respond that although Kant"s view that we cannot even lie to the murder at the door can hardly be defended,if we take into account the unpredictability of the consequences of actions and moral luck,Kant"s theory of imputation is still reasonable since it aims to eliminate factors of luck in imputation and to focus on what agents can freely choose,i.e.,the maxim of an action and action itself.In the final chapter,I explore the significance of Kant"s theory of imputation.Its significance is as follows: first of all,the concept of freedom Kant emphasizes in his definition of imputation is more fundamental than the traditional concept of freedom as freedom from coercion or freedom of choice from alternatives,which provides a better foundation for imputation.Secondly,the distinction of moral imputation and legal imputation is more systematic in Kant"s theory of imputation,which transcends traditional theories of imputation in important respects.Finally,based on his transcendental idealism,Kant offers a reasonable defence of freedom and imputation,which can shed important light to the free will debate.