Philosophical Thought
eISSN : 0000-0000
10.5
citescore
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years
10.5
impact factor
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
pubmed
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
Embase
Biosis Preview
Volume 5, Issue 4 (2025)
3 2025, 5(4): 1001-1023 |
Back to browse issues page
History
Received: 2025/11/4 | Accepted: 2025/12/2 | Published: 2025/07/1
Received: 2025/11/4 | Accepted: 2025/12/2 | Published: 2025/07/1
How to cite this article
Sarebannejad M. Phronesis and the Autonomy of the Will: A Comparative Study of the Moral Foundations in the Philosophy of Aristotle and Kant. 3 2025; 5 (4) :1001-1023
URL: http://jpt.daneshafarand.org/article-6-82956-en.html
URL: http://jpt.daneshafarand.org/article-6-82956-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Abstract (692 Views)
The concept of phronesis in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, as practical reason, functions as the connecting link between moral and intellectual virtues and represents wisdom oriented toward judgment in particular situations of human life. In contrast, Kant in the Critique of Practical Reason, through the principle of autonomy of the will, conceives reason as the source of moral law and the foundation of the subject’s self-sufficiency. This article, using a comparative approach, analyzes the conceptual relation between Aristotelian phronesis and Kantian autonomy, and, in light of Gadamer’s hermeneutical philosophy as a complementary theory, examines the possibility of a historical and situational interpretation of practical reason. The research method is qualitative and descriptive–analytical, based on direct study of the primary texts. It concludes that practical reason, across these three frameworks, evolves from lived wisdom to transcendental law and finally to historical understanding, establishing a dynamic link among Aristotle, Kant, and Gadamer.
Keywords:
| | Full-Text (HTML) (4 Views)
References
1. Adamson P (2015). Philosophy in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Link]
2. Aristotle (2019). Nicomachean ethics. Irwin T, translator. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing. [Link]
3. Aristotle (2021). The politics. Saunders TJ, Sinclair TA, translators. London: Penguin Classics. [Link]
4. Aufderheide J, Bader RM, editors (2015). The highest good in Aristotle and Kant. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198714019.001.0001]
5. Banham G, Schulting D, Hems N, editors (2015). The Bloomsbury companion to Kant. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. [Link] [DOI:10.5040/9781474244664]
6. Baracchi C, editor (2013). The Bloomsbury companion to Aristotle. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. [Link] [DOI:10.5040/9781472548290]
7. Beck LW (1984). A commentary on Kant's critique of practical reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Link]
8. Celano AJ (2015). Aristotle's ethics and medieval philosophy: Moral goodness and practical wisdom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781316471241]
9. Coltman R (1998). The language of hermeneutics: Gadamer and Heidegger in dialogue. New York: SUNY Press. [Link]
10. Dean R (1999). The value of humanity in Kant's moral theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Link]
11. Dicenso JJ (1990). Hermeneutics and the disclosure of truth. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press. [Link]
12. Freydberg B (2005). Imagination in Kant's critique of practical reason. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. [Link] [DOI:10.2979/3811.0]
13. Gadamer HG (2013). Truth and method. Weinsheimer J, Marshall DG, translators. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. [Link]
14. González A (2009). Aristotle and Kant on practical reason: An annotation to Korsgaard. Acta Philosophica. 18(1):99-112. [Link]
15. Hills A (2014). Gesinnung: Responsibility, moral worth, and character. In: Michelson G, editor. Kant's religion within the boundaries of mere reason: A critical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 79-97. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139088138.005]
16. Kant I (2001). Critique of the power of judgment. Guyer P, Matthews E, translators. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511804656]
17. Kant I (2015). Critique of practical reason. Gregor M, translator. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Link]
18. Karbowski J (2019). God in ethics: Philosophy in practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Link]
19. Kavandi S, Ahmadi M (2019). Phronesis in Plato's intellectual System. Philosophical Investigations. 13(26), 317-337. [Persian] [Link]
20. Kietzmann C (2023). Teleological structures in human life. London: Routledge. [Link] [DOI:10.4324/9781003100775]
21. Kontos P (2020). Aristotle on the scope of practical reason: Spectators, legislators, hopes, and evils. London: Routledge. [Link] [DOI:10.4324/9781003165262]
22. Kristjánsson K, Fowers B (2024). Phronesis: Retrieving practical wisdom in psychology, philosophy, and education. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/oso/9780192871473.001.0001]
23. Louden RB (2010). Vigilantius: Morality for humans. In: Denis L, Sensen O, editors. Kant's lectures on ethics: A critical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 84-100. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139567527.008]
24. Miller J (2011). Introduction. In: Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics: A critical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 1-20. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511977626.002]
25. Murphy J (2010). Practical reason and moral psychology in Aristotle and Kant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Link]
26. Nazemi Ardakani A, Davari Ardakani R, Hosseini M (2019). Epistemological place of phronesis and its importance in Aristotle's philosophy of ethics. History of Philosophy. 1(10):63-78. [Persian] [Link]
27. Nazemi Ardakani A, Davari Ardakani R, Hosseini M (2021). Priority of Sophia to Phronesis and its significance in Aristotle's philosophy of ethics. History of Philosophy. 3(11):63-84. [Persian] [Link]
28. Reeve CDC (1992). Practices of reason: Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Link]
29. Rosenberg L (2018). The place of phronesis in Gadamer's hermeneutics [dissertation]. Sydney: Western Sydney University. [Link]
30. Roshani Rad H (2023). Phronesis and its relationship with theoretical wisdom according to Aristotle. Journal of Philosophical Thought. 3(1):59-72. [Persian] [Link] [DOI:10.58209/jpt.3.1.59]
31. Schneewind JB (1992). Autonomy, obligation, and virtue: An overview of Kant's moral philosophy. In: Guyer P, editor. The Cambridge companion to Kant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 309-341. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/CCOL0521365872.011]
32. Warnke G (1987). Gadamer: Hermeneutics, tradition and reason. California: Stanford University Press. [Link]
33. Wartenberg TE (1992). Reason and the practice of science. In: Guyer P, editor. The Cambridge companion to Kant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 228-248. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/CCOL0521365872.008]
34. Watkins E (2010). The antinomy of practical reason: Reason, the unconditioned and the highest good. In: Reath A, Timmermann J, editors. Kant's critique of practical reason: A critical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Link]
35. Wicks R (2010). Routledge philosophy guidebook to Kant on judgment. London: Routledge. [Link]