Really good lecture, however I would be so happy to see it in a higher quality since I can not see the words written on the whiteboard. Still, a great lecture!
Just throwing this out there, the Golden Rule is not hypothetical.... It would be interesting to know which translation or derivation you are speaking about, but the most common citing of the Golden Rule I know is Matthew 7:12, which parallels with Kant VERY closely. “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law of the prophets.” (King James Translation of the Bible) Kant's definition of the categorical imperative, “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law,” (Metaphysics of Morals) would be applied to the Golden Rule without problem. Were it that the clearly conditional aspect to the categorical imperative were met: that one wills it to be practiced by everyone.
Did Kant ever consider torture like the Spanish Inquisition? I doubt anyone can hold their moral imperative law during torture. You can be forced to lie. There seems like something more fundamental than moral imperatives. Pain is beyond.
I thought about it a little. Maybe "Escape Pain" is a moral imperative greater than "Tell the Truth". I really need to look into this more. I suppose "Tell the Truth," is not a categorical imperative if something supercedes it.
@@Paraselene_Tao Check out Kant's essay "On a supposed right to lie because of philanthropic concerns." It's usually included in the Hackett publications of the Groundwork, but I'm sure a resourceful person can find free pdf's online with a bit of searching. Your last comment is on the trail of something. Also worth considering is whether or not one can justify "Escape pain" as a categorical imperative. My sense is that one can't, at least not in the way that Kant is talking about Categorical Imperatives.
Vaclav Miller if I disagree with you then I don’t understand? What an idiotic pov. slavery cannot maximize happiness and wellbeing for all affected individuals. It would only maximize such for a particular group of people. Since slavery is not conducive with the ethics of utilitarianism, slavery is categorically wrong.
Vaclav Miller Utilitarianism aims to maximize the wellbeing of *ALL people*. The enslavement of one *person* is not the best good for the enslaved person. Therefore slavery isn’t the best good for ALL people and doesn’t adhere to utilitarianism ethics
@@PhilosophySama I don't think you know what 'all' means in the context. What if if I didn't enslave one person, all the other people on the planet would die? plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/#ClaUti
Tough crowd, Professor.
I thought you were very entertaining and you helped me process this reading.
Thanks!
yesss this guy is so entertaining i actually listened on normal speed
One thing to add to your lecture: the will is practical reason.
Really good lecture, however I would be so happy to see it in a higher quality since I can not see the words written on the whiteboard. Still, a great lecture!
Ugh i wish my professor was like you and actually made sense
Thank you.
Great!
I get the vibe this man likes coffee
lol he's great
"he is the same kant" if u know what i mean.
youre great at 2x times the speed
3x even more great!
I appreciate his lectures at the normal pace. He's one of the few lecturers I don't speed up.
@@soheil424 How do you get x3 ?
KANT SAVED THE BABY!!!
Just throwing this out there, the Golden Rule is not hypothetical.... It would be interesting to know which translation or derivation you are speaking about, but the most common citing of the Golden Rule I know is Matthew 7:12, which parallels with Kant VERY closely. “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law of the prophets.” (King James Translation of the Bible)
Kant's definition of the categorical imperative, “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law,” (Metaphysics of Morals) would be applied to the Golden Rule without problem. Were it that the clearly conditional aspect to the categorical imperative were met: that one wills it to be practiced by everyone.
Sound!
Did Kant ever consider torture like the Spanish Inquisition? I doubt anyone can hold their moral imperative law during torture. You can be forced to lie. There seems like something more fundamental than moral imperatives. Pain is beyond.
I thought about it a little. Maybe "Escape Pain" is a moral imperative greater than "Tell the Truth". I really need to look into this more.
I suppose "Tell the Truth," is not a categorical imperative if something supercedes it.
@@Paraselene_Tao
Check out Kant's essay "On a supposed right to lie because of philanthropic concerns." It's usually included in the Hackett publications of the Groundwork, but I'm sure a resourceful person can find free pdf's online with a bit of searching.
Your last comment is on the trail of something. Also worth considering is whether or not one can justify "Escape pain" as a categorical imperative. My sense is that one can't, at least not in the way that Kant is talking about Categorical Imperatives.
Is this why Nietzsche calls Kant like a closet Christian or something along those lines lmao?
If you don't flip the switch you haven't killed anyone but you have left it in the hands of God
Morality: the oldest grift.
Slavery is wrong even in utilitarianism 🙄
It's not categorically wrong under utilitarianism. If you think otherwise, you don't know what utilitarianism is.
Vaclav Miller if I disagree with you then I don’t understand? What an idiotic pov.
slavery cannot maximize happiness and wellbeing for all affected individuals. It would only maximize such for a particular group of people. Since slavery is not conducive with the ethics of utilitarianism, slavery is categorically wrong.
@@PhilosophySama What if enslaving one person effected infinite utility for the rest of the population?
Vaclav Miller
Utilitarianism aims to maximize the wellbeing of *ALL people*.
The enslavement of one *person* is not the best good for the enslaved person.
Therefore slavery isn’t the best good for ALL people and doesn’t adhere to utilitarianism ethics
@@PhilosophySama I don't think you know what 'all' means in the context. What if if I didn't enslave one person, all the other people on the planet would die? plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/#ClaUti