There are two distinct types of legal wrongdoing: civil and criminal. This article demonstrates in three ways that Immanuel Kant's Universal Principle of Right, properly interpreted, offers a plausible and resilient account of this important distinction. First, Kant's principle correctly identifies attempted crimes as crimes themselves even when they do not violate the rights of any individual. Second, it justifies our treatment of reckless endangerment as a crime by distinguishing it from ordinary negligence, traditionally thought to be only civilly wrong. Third, it explains and justifies differences between the features of traditional criminal punishments and the features of civil remedies. Moreover, the Universal Principle of Right yields a Kantian standard for criminal wrongdoing that is compelling enough to inform future philosophical inquiries into the nature and limits of the state's criminal lawmaking authority.

中文翻译：

---

两种类型的法律不当行为

有两种不同类型的法律不法行为：民事和刑事。本文从三个方面论证了伊曼纽尔·康德的普世权利原则，如果得到正确的解释，对这一重要区别提供了一个合理且有弹性的说明。首先，康德的原则正确地将未遂犯罪确定为犯罪本身，即使它们并未侵犯任何个人的权利。其次，它通过将鲁莽危害与普通过失区别开来证明我们将鲁莽危害视为犯罪是正当的，传统上被认为只是民事错误。第三，解释和论证了传统刑罚特征与民事救济特征的差异。而且，