Kant #1

This Lecture offers a brief biography of Kant and walks through Chapter One of "The Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals."

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Kant
• deontology
• ethics
• philosophy
• lecture

[kotofu]

I had to read Kant and couldn't understand shit. THIS is awesome.

[jcold007]

you are the shit

[SirJTHull]

Boom

[thahypeizreel]

Thank you, kind sir.

[jpbshsu]

Bravo

[SinfulMessiah]

@Msjrward No. Duty, in a Kantian sense, is purely rational and does not evaluate consequences like "good for society." To determine whether the Nazi is moral we have to look at his intentions and maxims. Moreover, his maxims cannot be tied down to particulars about the world. They must be universal in order to be rational.

[Msjrward]

This question goes out to anyone who's studied Kant more than me (I'm just starting my studies). Accroding to Kantian ethics, if a Nazi doctor believed killing the mentally challenged was a duty (because it was good for society) and he was doing it for that sake, would he be doing something moral?

[bhigr]

This is really a great presentation. The relationship between autonomy and duty is also quite interesting in Kant's philosophy, but then I haven't listened to your second lecture.. Great Work!

[seflersinsburg10]

If we are only to act on principles that we would will to be universal, does that mean that pacifism is the only ethical option? If no nation ever went to war, then the world would be a better place, right? But Kant insists (according the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) that a nation has a duty to protect its citizens, even if doing so means using force. Is there a contradiction here, or am I just imagining things?

[edgt]

this explanation really helped me out to understand what Kant tried to mean. Maybe this will be asking too much but you could use some graphics to make it even more understandable and your video would become AWESOME. Thank you!