yeah.... if Kant were this easy to understand I wouldnt spend hours a night trying to interpret the CPR. This is a silly video and although its arguments appear to be valid, they are not presented in a proper argument form, and an argument without such form is not sound. Back to sunday school for you...
One needs a deep understanding of Kant & a broad understanding of comparative religions to more fully appreciate the transcendent nature of this video's message. I thought it was artistically produced, succinct & totally inviting to the meditative experience that it engenders.
If you cant or don't want to get a copy of "Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals," just go to wikipedia, search for "Categorical imperative" and read it.
@ShallowOceanographer Yes, if Kant is anything it is a systematic thinker. There's no indication here of the logical connection between these sundry concepts and principles.
this dude was propaganda philosopher.different beliefs working in harmony is what makes life work morality should be simple.he was generalizing very complex issues his system was used to our detrement by universitys leading to a mess
Don't pay attention to GnomesAmok, he likes to deride people to make him feel better. Lets just let him thnik what he wants, he's a complete idiot. He's full of bs, he's just fallacy and mouth, don't be intimidated by this pompous moron. (He yet hasn't realized that this 'man's genius' prove God's existance and destroyed Atheism. =p
Divine commands? Who says we all have a duty to adhere to? There IS NO GOD, if "He" existed, where is he? Who proved it? Where's the logic in that? People wish to act on mysticism and skepticism rather than reason and reality, this quote at the end I do not agree with at all.
The existance of objective morality in itself presupposes the logical neccesity of 'He'. Who proved it, in fact, the same guy you're hearing about prove him. kant prove God's existance through a method in which he based off kis Kantanian criticism, which ended the Rationalist vs. empiricst feud. Transcendentalist arguments were used not only to end the feud, but to prove God's logical necessity in the Universe. It also provided a stance to stand on for philosophy and science.
What does causality have anything to do with this? I won't go into the reasons why you brought that up, maybe you just need an argument to go on since you can't refute the argument. Well, Plato awnsers that question. There can never be an infinite regression of things, so ther emust be an uncaused cause for all causes stem from, and that cause is God. We already know the Universe is caused, and by the argument above, and many others, we can bring the logical necessity of God.
The Universe bagn to exist, what I mean by Universe is the laws of Phsyics, spacetime, and matter. Matter and energy, and maybe the laws of Physics have always existed. Spacetime at one point did not exist. The laws of Physics at one point were equal and displayed supersymmetry. Something caused spacetime to exist, while simoultanouesly creat precise and proportioned laws of Physics, and allowed for energy which was suppossed to be entropy to be usable. That cause was intelligent
@ogirv101 Just because space and time came into existence without our understanding of how, or laws of physics that eventually lead to the sustainability of live, it does not mean that it was a result, or the doing, of an intelligent being (by intelligent, I presume you mean a God or a Divine Being with intelligence beyond our comprehension). It is a fallacy to shift the unknown workings of the universe to an Intelligent Being, whatever your concept of intelligent is.
Who else? You have fallen prey to the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. You use atrocious phrasing to say in so many words "because we have morals, God exists" (never mind that your belief in a God that is responsible for all causes refutes your conclusion that your future is not predetermined!)
Anyway, these types of videos are utterly useless except as a display of fallacious argumentation.
So thanks for so clearly elucidating these fallacies.
No, the belief in God is not only the reason why he has morals, it's the underlying necessity for all of morality. There are only two world views, that of a God and that of there is none, if you ue reason, you use the law of ecluded middle, and cretae two world views. The 'God worldview' provides a foundation for objective ethical morality, metaphysical naturalism (the other, Atheism) has no foundation for objective ethical morality.
yeah.... if Kant were this easy to understand I wouldnt spend hours a night trying to interpret the CPR. This is a silly video and although its arguments appear to be valid, they are not presented in a proper argument form, and an argument without such form is not sound. Back to sunday school for you...
jayviper 5 months ago
Well done video. Recommended!
One needs a deep understanding of Kant & a broad understanding of comparative religions to more fully appreciate the transcendent nature of this video's message. I thought it was artistically produced, succinct & totally inviting to the meditative experience that it engenders.
This producer is a worthy subscription.
Thanks for uploading.
BrotherWoody1 7 months ago 3
Immanuel can !
BiggerThinking1 8 months ago
nt
WaterLikey 8 months ago
@jimbojimmothy sap
i1v1a0n 10 months ago
Where does this music come from? I swear I've heard it before.
MAJ061785 10 months ago
thanks
SuperCreamface 1 year ago
Your conclusions does not necessarily follow from the premise given; most noticeably, the one about God's existence.
DJZanark 1 year ago
Go read some actual Kant before labelling your vid such. He's rolling in his grave.
sbrafk 1 year ago
If you cant or don't want to get a copy of "Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals," just go to wikipedia, search for "Categorical imperative" and read it.
Rarnabybudge 1 year ago
@ShallowOceanographer Yes, if Kant is anything it is a systematic thinker. There's no indication here of the logical connection between these sundry concepts and principles.
theyself 1 year ago
Good vid I liked it
DreadedDrew 1 year ago
@DreadedDrew ...but can be misleading.
DJZanark 1 year ago
this dude was propaganda philosopher.different beliefs working in harmony is what makes life work morality should be simple.he was generalizing very complex issues his system was used to our detrement by universitys leading to a mess
ninjafretshadow 1 year ago
@jimbojimmothy:
Don't pay attention to GnomesAmok, he likes to deride people to make him feel better. Lets just let him thnik what he wants, he's a complete idiot. He's full of bs, he's just fallacy and mouth, don't be intimidated by this pompous moron. (He yet hasn't realized that this 'man's genius' prove God's existance and destroyed Atheism. =p
ogirv101 2 years ago
Divine commands? Who says we all have a duty to adhere to? There IS NO GOD, if "He" existed, where is he? Who proved it? Where's the logic in that? People wish to act on mysticism and skepticism rather than reason and reality, this quote at the end I do not agree with at all.
RleeZam777 2 years ago
@RleeZam777:
The existance of objective morality in itself presupposes the logical neccesity of 'He'. Who proved it, in fact, the same guy you're hearing about prove him. kant prove God's existance through a method in which he based off kis Kantanian criticism, which ended the Rationalist vs. empiricst feud. Transcendentalist arguments were used not only to end the feud, but to prove God's logical necessity in the Universe. It also provided a stance to stand on for philosophy and science.
ogirv101 2 years ago
Ok, but you can't reverse the law of causality now can you?? So who or what created God??
RleeZam777 2 years ago
@RleeZam777:
What does causality have anything to do with this? I won't go into the reasons why you brought that up, maybe you just need an argument to go on since you can't refute the argument. Well, Plato awnsers that question. There can never be an infinite regression of things, so ther emust be an uncaused cause for all causes stem from, and that cause is God. We already know the Universe is caused, and by the argument above, and many others, we can bring the logical necessity of God.
ogirv101 2 years ago
So you mean to tell me that a factory is just built like that? That there are no preexisting conditions as to how that "factory" was built?
RleeZam777 2 years ago
@RleeZam777:
The Universe bagn to exist, what I mean by Universe is the laws of Phsyics, spacetime, and matter. Matter and energy, and maybe the laws of Physics have always existed. Spacetime at one point did not exist. The laws of Physics at one point were equal and displayed supersymmetry. Something caused spacetime to exist, while simoultanouesly creat precise and proportioned laws of Physics, and allowed for energy which was suppossed to be entropy to be usable. That cause was intelligent
ogirv101 2 years ago
@ogirv101 Just because space and time came into existence without our understanding of how, or laws of physics that eventually lead to the sustainability of live, it does not mean that it was a result, or the doing, of an intelligent being (by intelligent, I presume you mean a God or a Divine Being with intelligence beyond our comprehension). It is a fallacy to shift the unknown workings of the universe to an Intelligent Being, whatever your concept of intelligent is.
DJZanark 1 year ago
@ogirv101 Spacetime did not exist at one point? Then what space did your god occupy before he created space/time?
jayviper 5 months ago
@jayviper god is over space time, he isn't submitted to it at all!
Narftaxaku200 1 month ago
Who else? You have fallen prey to the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. You use atrocious phrasing to say in so many words "because we have morals, God exists" (never mind that your belief in a God that is responsible for all causes refutes your conclusion that your future is not predetermined!)
Anyway, these types of videos are utterly useless except as a display of fallacious argumentation.
So thanks for so clearly elucidating these fallacies.
GnomesAmok 2 years ago
@GnomesAmok:
No, the belief in God is not only the reason why he has morals, it's the underlying necessity for all of morality. There are only two world views, that of a God and that of there is none, if you ue reason, you use the law of ecluded middle, and cretae two world views. The 'God worldview' provides a foundation for objective ethical morality, metaphysical naturalism (the other, Atheism) has no foundation for objective ethical morality.
ogirv101 2 years ago
woot first comment ok anyway i think goodness comes from the heart however it is measured by others
carsomedan 2 years ago