Regarding the “ lying to a murderer,” this could be an example of a bad actor’s language game. He is not asking for the friend’s location just to know (as a good dialectician would). Rather, he is asking for your help/permission to murder your friend. So answering “No” is not lying. Kart’s point about detaching action from effect would still apply.
On the other hand, the man was untruthful when he said that his friend could hide in his house. He should fairly say that he is a fundamentalist Kantian freak and he would tell the psychopath where he was, the first time he asked.
I find it simplistic using the universal thing like kant says, i think a more realistic approach should be to use a universal law something like "not do harm or try to reduce when the harm is unavoidable". I think this "law" is kinda universal and it could be applied better to all the examples, e.g. you would lie to the murderer with the axe because you must reduce the harm in people, and the right to live outweights the right to know the truth.
I love your interpretation and I align with it very strongly, first thing that comes to mind is the point I heard from a lecturer that all Kindergarten Teachers are Kantian philosophers in essence, leading to the apparent truth that at least subconsciously Kantian thought may reign true
@@skaldsyn759 Thanks, that's an interesting thing to say. I think I agree. I have the thought kids generally have a simpler way to look life, which is perfect for Kantian thoughts. However for us it would be more difficult to use simple rules in our day to day life. That's why basically I agree with the lecturer you mention. I would be interested in knowing how to modify Kant to fit better complex situations.
Regarding the “ lying to a murderer,” this could be an example of a bad actor’s language game. He is not asking for the friend’s location just to know (as a good dialectician would). Rather, he is asking for your help/permission to murder your friend. So answering “No” is not lying.
Kart’s point about detaching action from effect would still apply.
I just finished "Monster" and this video was immediately recommended
It's good right?
god knows why i chose this for my paper.
Goodluck!
On the other hand, the man was untruthful when he said that his friend could hide in his house. He should fairly say that he is a fundamentalist Kantian freak and he would tell the psychopath where he was, the first time he asked.
Also thanks for covering metaphysics!
No prob, more metaphysics coming next video
this was extremely helpful, thank you
I find it simplistic using the universal thing like kant says, i think a more realistic approach should be to use a universal law something like "not do harm or try to reduce when the harm is unavoidable". I think this "law" is kinda universal and it could be applied better to all the examples, e.g. you would lie to the murderer with the axe because you must reduce the harm in people, and the right to live outweights the right to know the truth.
I love your interpretation and I align with it very strongly, first thing that comes to mind is the point I heard from a lecturer that all Kindergarten Teachers are Kantian philosophers in essence, leading to the apparent truth that at least subconsciously Kantian thought may reign true
@@skaldsyn759 Thanks, that's an interesting thing to say. I think I agree. I have the thought kids generally have a simpler way to look life, which is perfect for Kantian thoughts. However for us it would be more difficult to use simple rules in our day to day life. That's why basically I agree with the lecturer you mention.
I would be interested in knowing how to modify Kant to fit better complex situations.
isnt that kinda just utilitarianism?
Nice monster reference
The way I shrieked when I saw a Johan stick figure on my screen
What about the guy he lost that essay competition to?
Kant lost an essay competition to someone? Who is it I gotta know
Rogue one IS a good star wars movie!!!!