Top Comments
All Comments (59)
-
Great video! It's very enlightening.
-
I think stefbot has a point in saying that Rands view does not convince people who are immoral that they should change their ways, but I think Rand was right when she said that the moral thing to do is to do what benefits you on a principled level. The problem is that immoral people never think about principles. Bill Clinton doesn't live a good life, but he refuses to admit it, even to himself (money and power is not the same as happiness).
-
I know you are just gathering speed. So I am looking forward to part 2.
-
Yes.
-
You read that in the instruction manual?
-
Individuals are free to pursue what they please, as long as any action does not deprive others from pursuing what they please.
-
Again, no reading neccessary! It's taught, it's a social persepective. I'm afraid I can hardly debate this anymore, we are starting towards areas where I disagree with UPB, so I concede that it can't be "known"
-
@DreadLaw2, you can't "know" something just by reading it in a book. Things need to be realized. That's what I mean by "insight". A system without such insight will be just as evil as religion.
lol, you're having waaay too much fun with the new title maker XD
enotdetcelfer 2 years ago 6
Great video! I should mention, however, that I think you have slightly misrepresented Kant's theory of ethics. It consists of several steps which touch upon two fundamental questions of validity. The first question is "are there any internal contradictions in my moral law when applied universally?" and the second question, assuming it survives the first, is "could I will that this be a universal moral law?" You mentioned the latter. Not to say that Kant's theory is not still problematic.
ashtebula 2 years ago 4