Arthur Schopenhauer: A question of motive

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
1,631
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Top Comments

  • I'm sorry, only UPB adequately and consistently makes the case that murder is immoral.

  • For those expecting one long video, i have changed my mind. instead I will make several smaller videos elaborating on different aspects of his philosophy.

Video Responses

This video is a response to Schopenhauer: Atheist, Idealist, Visionary
see all

All Comments (54)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • When a religious person says that atheists are immoral because of a lack of god.What I hear them saying is that without fear of their god they would be someone from whom we would be wise to shield our children.This in turn tells me we should now protect our loved ones from them as they are just one slip up from going with their base desires.

  • @SecularNumanist Absolutely, Nietzsche stance of morality is that there is no rational justification for it, including his own.

  • @SecularNumanist Kant's view is ambiguous on that.

  • @LittleSn00py

    Kant himself was a determinist though.

  • @LittleSn00py

    Right well can't that same critique be used against any and all beliefs including Nietzsche's own?

  • @SecularNumanist Kant may think he's discovering something objective that applies to all rational beings, but is deluding himself. Also, such an ethics presupposes one is a free moral agent, something Nietzsche vehemently denied as a hard determinist.

  • @SecularNumanist Nietzsche often used genetic fallacies in his rhetoric. The supposed reasons why Kant believes about ethics do show he believes it for irrational reasons. His belief in the categorical imperative is irrational. Product of psycho-physical facts about him. Kant derives the categorical imperative as the product of the human mind, something that stems from it. The categorical imperative is the product of Kant's irrational psyche the way a schizophrenic's psyche produces delusions.

  • @LittleSn00py

    Well isnt that just one big genetic fallacy? Explaining where it comes from doesn't refute its validity.

    And saying you dont share his psychological profile doesnt really deal with the categorical imperative, becaue the whole point in the CA is that it doesnt need a psychological profile, it just applies to all rational beings.

    Instead, the best refutation is just to say that a deliberate action without a motive is a contradiction in itself.

  • @SecularNumanist I'd go the nietzschean route: the categorical imperative is Kant's invention; it is the product of his personality. I don't share his psychological profile, so his moral prejudice doesn't apply to me.

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more