Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Kantian ethics/1: Difference between revisions

===[[Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Kantian ethics/1|Kantian ethics]]===

: {{al|Kantian ethics|noname=yes}} • <span class="plainlinksneverexpand">[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/Kantian_ethics/1&action=watch Watch article reassessment page]</span> • [[Talk:Kantian ethics/GA1|Most recent review]]

The part of the article about Kant's ethical theory is mostly just a presentation of the formulations of the categorical imperative from the ''Groundwork'' (which, as per title, is the grounding of his moral theory, not the actual theory). There is no discussion of the ''Critique of Practical Reason''. Although I added a section on the ''Metaphysics of Morals'', it is only the bare minimum of what a specialized article should include. For this reason it fails GA criterion 3a.

 

:I agree with the points being raised. An important oversight seems to be that there is nothing about [[neo-Kantianism]]. The point raised on the talk-page about Korsgaard is still valid. In relation to criterion 2b, there are some unreferenced and partially referenced paragraphs but this by itself would not be too difficult to address. [[User:Phlsph7|Phlsph7]] ([[User talk:Phlsph7|talk]]) 08:49, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

::I would love a section on neo-Kantianism! Had no idea there even was an ethical tradition there. [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 21:07, 17 December 2023 (UTC)