“There are two main reasons that Kant refuses to allow that sympathy or any other empirical sentiment or desire could constitute the foundation of morality. One is that no sentiment of this kind can yield the kinds of objective and universal principles that morality requires. They can approximate to this only by claiming a greater empirical uniformity in human nature than experience shows to be there. […] Kant’s other main reason for rejecting sympathy or love as the basis of morality involves his view of the empirical psychology of these feelings as they arise in us in our social condition, and especially in the “civilized” condition of modern European society.”
Kantian Ethics (2008)
Help us to complete the source, original and additional information
Allen W. Wood 14
academic 1942Related quotes

For the first kind of morality, that is, for self-restraint, I have the greatest respect. The second kind of morality I do not respect except when it constitutes self-defense. (For example, when women say that rape and wife-beating are immoral, that is self-defense.) I have noticed that the people who try hardest to impose moral code on others (not in self-defense) are often the least careful to abide by that moral code themselves.
"Morality and Revolution"
The Road to Revolution (2008)

Source: Doing Virtuous Business (Thomas Nelson, 2011), p. 108.

"Morality and Revolution"
The Road to Revolution (2008)

Source: Words of a Sage : Selected thoughts of African Spir (1937), p. 61.

“I've argued that many of what philosophers call moral sentiments can be seen in other species.”
"Confessions of a Lonely Atheist" by Natalie Angier, in The New York Times Magazine (14 January 2001) http://partners.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/20010114mag-atheism.html
Context: I've argued that many of what philosophers call moral sentiments can be seen in other species. In chimpanzees and other animals, you see examples of sympathy, empathy, reciprocity, a willingness to follow social rules. Dogs are a good example of a species that have and obey social rules; that's why we like them so much, even though they're large carnivores.
“Liberalism and its Discontents,” pp. 20-21.
Outside Ethics (2005)

p. 485 http://books.google.com/books?id=ePNi4ZqYdVQC&q=%22humans+are+interchangeable%22
The Blank Slate (2002)
Source: The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature
Context: [E]quality is not the empirical claim that all groups of humans are interchangeable; it is the moral principle that individuals should not be judged or constrained by the average properties of their group. … If we recognize this principle, no one has to spin myths about the indistinguishability of the sexes to justify equality.

Statement of President Obama on the death of Vaclav Havel (18 December 2011) http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/18/statement-president-obama-death-vaclav-havel
2011
Context: Having encountered many setbacks, Havel lived with a spirit of hope, which he defined as “the ability to work for something because it is good, not just because it stands a chance to succeed.” His peaceful resistance shook the foundations of an empire, exposed the emptiness of a repressive ideology, and proved that moral leadership is more powerful than any weapon. He played a seminal role in the Velvet Revolution that won his people their freedom and inspired generations to reach for self-determination and dignity in all parts of the world.