The script to this video is part of the Philosophy Vibe - "Ethics" eBook, available on Amazon: mybook.to/philosophyvibe4 The Philosophy Vibe Paperback Anthology Vol 3 'Ethics & Political Philosophy' available worldwide on Amazon: mybook.to/philosophyvibevol3
this is so great! explains Kant's ideas so clearly and the way the second character asks questions after each point really helps when trying to write a clear summary/explanation of Kant's theory :) amazing
Try to write as though your method of writing were universal law. What if everyone wrote without capitalization or commas or periods? Writing would become meaningless, chaos would ensue ....
With the situation of the employee seeking to murder his boss it’s not so clear cut that lying will necessarily save this persons life. What if the boss overheard your old coworker and attempts to escape outside. But because you seek to save your bosses life you lie to your old coworker and tell him he’s not there. Your old coworker than leaves and runs into your boss outside and kills him. We’re you morally justified in the lie?
If your friend says "Don't help the dying person, take me to the movies NOW like you promised!", then stop being that person's friend. That's a shitty friend. lol.
Deontological ethics & utilitarianism both have pros and cons, ideally we ought to have a mixture of the two. I think W.D Ross may provide an answer to this issue. Great work, as usual.
I honestly love these animated characters' visual design, the setting, ambience and their voice modulation so much. I am afraid I am getting addicted to this channel to the extent it may be interfering with my work, but I love this channel to the moon and back, it provides me with such emotional comfort that I am starting to cry now. Keep up the great work!
The suffering person on the floor becomes a duty of care for both individuals. I mean if the friend that was promised to be taken to cinema sees the person on the floor in need his duty of care weights heavier than his desire to go to the cinema and both individuals act in good will giving the needed help to the individual on the floor. After that is done they can arrange the cinema deal again.
there's problems with the criticism's as you can still help someone who needs medical assistance and take your friend to the cinema they would just have to wait a bit longer and the first problem says that you must not lie however if someone is going to be murdered with an axe you also have the duty to intervene
Was good until the end where u went really off the rails, Kant is not a simple as a general blanket morality over even different situations, but that in a specific situation, everyone should do x. For example, in general it is bad to lie etc. And in specific, Kant would say, in the murderer exanpme you gave, it is ok for everyone to lie then. Yes it is a blanket across every actor, but not a blanket across every scene.
When you say "following utilitarianism could lead to morally depraved actions being permissible" how is that not question begging? Considering that we're having discussion about what is moral in the first place.
In the case of duty to two opposing ideas, you would need to prioritise based on severity. While the needs of the friend are important, its not more important than a person dying. Therefore, rescheduling would be necessary.
u become unmoral person breaking promise, n save other u become moral at other, there is no scale for it only binary law, people is moral n unmoral at the same time its human, simply no moraly perfect human, but the will to always able to do the duty of becoming more moral person is the main objective, regarding the outcome, struggle to become morally perfect person, ""do not blurr the law by the outcome, the law is 1+1=2"" the human pursuit of perfect moral.
Lying to save a Life is a good reason to violate Kant's philosophy even if one is a genuine honorable and honest person. I mean integrity, but with little occasional twists in situations when lying to save a Life would make one feel proud of himself. As much as I agree with Kant in almost everything, I have a mind of my own and I would in certain situations violate my own principles if the situations calls it. It is moral responsibility. What is better I would ask myself: do I say the truth and another person gets killed because of me or shall I save a Life by lying? I will have to lie in that situation. I would not like to live with the thought that one is dead because of me. But I would live guilt free knowing that me telling a sweet innocent lie saved a Life.
Thank you so much for putting this material out. I'm back in school after 10 years, plus Im ESL so understanding Philosophy has been pretty hard. After I started watching your videos I was able to understand the concepts better. THANK YOU SO MUCH!!
I am only partway into the video, but I want to comment on certain points in the video as I watch it so that I can easily keep track of my ideas and objections. My first objection is that there are certain acts that are considered good for society when done by a small number of people but would be catastrophic if universalized. Therefore if everyone made sure not to do things that would be catastrophic if universalized, many good and even necessary duties would be neglected causing a catastrophe.
Hey, interesting point, could you give an example of an "act that is considered good for society when done by a small number of people but would be catastrophic if universalized." ?
@@cahierdepluie9590 Hegel gave an example which goes as follows: 'Helping the poor is technically an action to prevent someone else from helping the poor; meaning if all financially capable people gave to the poor, there will be no more poor people to be helped.' so is helping the poor *really* good? This roughly refutes the categorical imperative theory and preaches utilitarianism which can be refuted easily, so we are left with a void on the moral thrown, deeming morality as subjective.
Exactly, you don't have a duty to answer the question. As for the other dilemma with the friend and the cinema, if they were also following Kantian ethics, then they would rush over to help you with the person dying as that duty, and your promise is not broken as you are still there with your friend. That duty supersedes the selfish act of ignoring her and going to the cinema.
I am a college student 👩🎓 and I have the philosophy, to tell the truth I don't understand anything my professor is very rude to me. can you help me with this question According to Kant, we have a duty not to lie. But imagine the following scenario. You are living in Nazi Germany, and your best friend, who is Jewish, is hiding from the Nazis in your basement. One morning a Nazi knocks on your door asking you whether there are any Jews hidden in your house. Do you think it would be moral to lie? Why? Does Kant think it would be moral to lie? Why? Every time I do the homework he says that I am copying from the internet and he gives me an F and I had told him that I am not using the internet but he says that he doesn't care what I am saying.can you tell me what should I do.
You could say that the axe man was violating his own categorical imperative to not be violent, and thus it becomes the categorical imperative of everyone else to stop him by force, in a sense overriding the imperative to not lie. Essentially, any time someone violates one imperative -- all bets are off and that person becomes a target. The only other alternative is a situation where we have cultural relativism and a virtue ethics.
Not, since our duties are to be fulfilled in all situations no matter what. Although not saying anything wouldn't be a lie, a rational being wouldn't count speechless actions as rational mandatories, and so the case remains against the categorical imperatives.
Seems like this just means "never lie" can't be a categorical imperative, you need to abstract by at least one more level to some more fundamental principle and try again.
El imperativo categórico también conduce a aceptar la arbitrariedad del deber. Usándolo cómo ley universal, se puede llegar por el mismo camino a conclusiones opuestas: O bien todos deberían tener propiedad privada, o bien nadie debería tenerla.
there must be a balance between kantian ethics and utilitarianism. goodwill is practicality. if everyone practiced goodwill to one another, they would see the dying person on the street and simply help them, because THAT is goodwill and moral duty. it is necessary for a mutually beneficial world to thrive and be sustainable. if everyone gained personal pleasure from helping others, there would be no problems in the world.
Thank you! You've really helped me come to understand Kant's ethics, video form is awesome, I find it just endlessly difficult to read through the textbook and pull too much from it.
Great vid! Gotta provide a bit of constructive criticism though. The guy in the purple jacket had a voice that was paaainfully monotone. Otherwise, very well done vid!
well, now i dont have to read kants 16 pages glued in my textbook anymore.. thank u gentlemenn! this was good. you litterally turnd my 3 hours of reading him in to 8 min long. bravo.
Contradiction is defined in Kantian morality as an action against the rational properties (e.g.: a lie is against truth, and since trust is derived from truth, it is against trust).
When it comes to the axe. No according to Kant you should make a moral principle around the idea of the axe and create a maxim around it the guys not a moron he’s a genius
The script to this video is part of the Philosophy Vibe - "Ethics" eBook, available on Amazon:
mybook.to/philosophyvibe4
The Philosophy Vibe Paperback Anthology Vol 3 'Ethics & Political Philosophy' available worldwide on Amazon:
mybook.to/philosophyvibevol3
The friend expectantly pointing at the movie theater while there's a dying person on the sidewalk was so funny
this is so great! explains Kant's ideas so clearly and the way the second character asks questions after each point really helps when trying to write a clear summary/explanation of Kant's theory :) amazing
Thank you. Glad this video has helped!
Try to write as though your method of writing were universal law. What if everyone wrote without capitalization or commas or periods? Writing would become meaningless, chaos would ensue ....
i simply love philosophy vibes. You guys make my life so much easier.
Thank you for you comment. So happy to read these videos are helping you!
naah its pretty stupid
I can get lit up with philosophy conversation anytime. Definitely not a stupid course to take
@@cmadden92 as a philosophy major, I am obviously inclined to agree but thank you :) many people dismiss studying philosophy.
things you are doing are hella helpful!! thanks
Glad we could help :D
With the situation of the employee seeking to murder his boss it’s not so clear cut that lying will necessarily save this persons life. What if the boss overheard your old coworker and attempts to escape outside. But because you seek to save your bosses life you lie to your old coworker and tell him he’s not there. Your old coworker than leaves and runs into your boss outside and kills him. We’re you morally justified in the lie?
so kantian ethics focuses on duty ?
Do you think "fetus does not have any rights because of the absence of Autonomy and rationality" is correct following Kantian ethics?
Lovely vidz
Thank you 😀
If your friend says "Don't help the dying person, take me to the movies NOW like you promised!", then stop being that person's friend.
That's a shitty friend. lol.
it's only a hypothetical to disprove Kantian ethics
Yeah, pretty sure one of his principles was also to help people so he would have probably just left that person standing.
Deontological ethics & utilitarianism both have pros and cons, ideally we ought to have a mixture of the two. I think W.D Ross may provide an answer to this issue. Great work, as usual.
This video was very helpful! Now it 's time to go pass my ethics midterm exam.
Thank you, and best of luck in the exam.
this feels like eavesdropping a conversation you deadly want to be a part of
I honestly love these animated characters' visual design, the setting, ambience and their voice modulation so much. I am afraid I am getting addicted to this channel to the extent it may be interfering with my work, but I love this channel to the moon and back, it provides me with such emotional comfort that I am starting to cry now. Keep up the great work!
Thank you very much. We're so happy you're enjoying the videos. And there's still a lot more to come :)
The voices sound really dry but the information is really good so its worth watching a few times for revision. Cheers
in it fam
@@rafalkruk6930 in what?
A video that explains the theory very well and gives a rebuttal allowing for deeper thought. Rare, very rare, these days.
Glad you enjoyed :)
The suffering person on the floor becomes a duty of care for both individuals. I mean if the friend that was promised to be taken to cinema sees the person on the floor in need his duty of care weights heavier than his desire to go to the cinema and both individuals act in good will giving the needed help to the individual on the floor. After that is done they can arrange the cinema deal again.
Well said 👏🏽
thank you so much for these videos, really helping me through my a-levels.
Pleasure. Glad they are helping, best of luck in the exams.
...I see. XD
Shut up
I watched almost 10 videos for kant. This is the most succinct version.🙏🙏
Thank you, glad you enjoyed.
Thank you so much for posting this! It clarified my understanding of Kantian Ethics helped me understand this concept from lecture at a deeper level.
You're very welcome, glad it was helpful :)
there's problems with the criticism's as you can still help someone who needs medical assistance and take your friend to the cinema they would just have to wait a bit longer and the first problem says that you must not lie however if someone is going to be murdered with an axe you also have the duty to intervene
Was good until the end where u went really off the rails, Kant is not a simple as a general blanket morality over even different situations, but that in a specific situation, everyone should do x. For example, in general it is bad to lie etc. And in specific, Kant would say, in the murderer exanpme you gave, it is ok for everyone to lie then. Yes it is a blanket across every actor, but not a blanket across every scene.
The host looks like Edward Snowden, and I'm actually charmed by the other dude's voice. He sounds high, but an intellectual :D
6:50 duty is only the baseline, moral aituations are the exception. The example was brought up as if you have to save a life everyday.
When you say "following utilitarianism could lead to morally depraved actions being permissible" how is that not question begging? Considering that we're having discussion about what is moral in the first place.
In the case of duty to two opposing ideas, you would need to prioritise based on severity. While the needs of the friend are important, its not more important than a person dying. Therefore, rescheduling would be necessary.
So we should be ethical because it is our duty and we should do our duty because it will create a better world?
u become unmoral person breaking promise, n save other u become moral at other, there is no scale for it only binary law, people is moral n unmoral at the same time its human, simply no moraly perfect human, but the will to always able to do the duty of becoming more moral person is the main objective, regarding the outcome, struggle to become morally perfect person, ""do not blurr the law by the outcome, the law is 1+1=2"" the human pursuit of perfect moral.
Lying to save a Life is a good reason to violate Kant's philosophy even if one is a genuine honorable and honest person.
I mean integrity, but with little occasional twists in situations when lying to save a Life would make one feel proud of himself.
As much as I agree with Kant in almost everything, I have a mind of my own and I would in certain situations violate my own principles if the situations calls it. It is moral responsibility.
What is better I would ask myself: do I say the truth and another person gets killed because of me or shall I save a Life by lying? I will have to lie in that situation. I would not like to live with the thought that one is dead because of me. But I would live guilt free knowing that me telling a sweet innocent lie saved a Life.
Really enjoyed the video, I wish text books were written this way.
Thank you, glad you enjoyed.
YOUR TOO FAST THOUGH
I wonder if one day humanity will come to an undisputed moral law that can’t be contradicted.
वाह।बहुत ही सुन्दर, सरल भाषा में और बेहद कम शब्दों में रोमांचित तरीके से स्पष्ट कर दिया।
बहुत बहुत धन्यवाद 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
आपका बहुत बहुत धन्यवाद। हमें खुशी है कि आपने आनंद लिया।
Thank you so much for putting this material out. I'm back in school after 10 years, plus Im ESL so understanding Philosophy has been pretty hard. After I started watching your videos I was able to understand the concepts better. THANK YOU SO MUCH!!
It's a pleasure, so glad we could help. Best of luck in the course!
I totally feel you. I just recently got accepted into school after working abroad for the past 12 years. Good luck, this is extremely helpful.
I am only partway into the video, but I want to comment on certain points in the video as I watch it so that I can easily keep track of my ideas and objections.
My first objection is that there are certain acts that are considered good for society when done by a small number of people but would be catastrophic if universalized. Therefore if everyone made sure not to do things that would be catastrophic if universalized, many good and even necessary duties would be neglected causing a catastrophe.
Hey, interesting point, could you give an example of an "act that is considered good for society when done by a small number of people but would be catastrophic if universalized." ?
jiggyjamalwillslapabean Getting any particular job, like becoming a software engineer.
@@cahierdepluie9590 Hegel gave an example which goes as follows: 'Helping the poor is technically an action to prevent someone else from helping the poor; meaning if all financially capable people gave to the poor, there will be no more poor people to be helped.' so is helping the poor *really* good? This roughly refutes the categorical imperative theory and preaches utilitarianism which can be refuted easily, so we are left with a void on the moral thrown, deeming morality as subjective.
Thank you for this video!!
Happy to help.
Wow, wish I found this channel when I was taking upper division philosophy classes in college lol
You don't have to LIE, don't say anything at all.
Exactly, you don't have a duty to answer the question. As for the other dilemma with the friend and the cinema, if they were also following Kantian ethics, then they would rush over to help you with the person dying as that duty, and your promise is not broken as you are still there with your friend. That duty supersedes the selfish act of ignoring her and going to the cinema.
U.S. politics has gone into a utilitarian mode of ethics.
0:16
Take A Moment Relax and Enjoy Genius at play 0:32 ❤
Thank you for this video! It really helped. I love your voice too!
Thank you :) glad it helped.
Excellent video. Summary of 100s of pages packed within 10 minutes.
Wonderful explanation!!
This guys made ethics fun
You're the best, you're the best, you're the bestttt!
I am a college student 👩🎓 and I have the philosophy, to tell the truth I don't understand anything my professor is very rude to me. can you help me with this question According to Kant, we have a duty not to lie. But imagine the following scenario. You are living in Nazi Germany, and your best friend, who is Jewish, is hiding from the Nazis in your basement. One morning a Nazi knocks on your door asking you whether there are any Jews hidden in your house. Do you think it would be moral to lie? Why? Does Kant think it would be moral to lie? Why?
Every time I do the homework he says that I am copying from the internet and he gives me an F and I had told him that I am not using the internet but he says that he doesn't care what I am saying.can you tell me what should I do.
can i ask a favor can you give me the definition of will, universalizability, and respect and give me some explanation plssss😭😭
You could say that the axe man was violating his own categorical imperative to not be violent, and thus it becomes the categorical imperative of everyone else to stop him by force, in a sense overriding the imperative to not lie.
Essentially, any time someone violates one imperative -- all bets are off and that person becomes a target.
The only other alternative is a situation where we have cultural relativism and a virtue ethics.
The Kingdom of Ends. I immediately thought of the four creeps in Sade's 120 Days of Sodom.
Yay! Love the video. Keep it up guys!
Thank you 😊
Wouldn't the alternative to lying to the ax-murderer be to attempt to stop said murderer rather than telling the truth?
Both. But there's other options not explored. You could not say anything at all, or scream to your boss to run or maybe fight the axe man.
Not, since our duties are to be fulfilled in all situations no matter what. Although not saying anything wouldn't be a lie, a rational being wouldn't count speechless actions as rational mandatories, and so the case remains against the categorical imperatives.
Seems like this just means "never lie" can't be a categorical imperative, you need to abstract by at least one more level to some more fundamental principle and try again.
Thank you soo much for such clear explanations... ❤😌
Glad we could help.
El imperativo categórico también conduce a aceptar la arbitrariedad del deber. Usándolo cómo ley universal, se puede llegar por el mismo camino a conclusiones opuestas:
O bien todos deberían tener propiedad privada, o bien nadie debería tenerla.
Do you think "fetus does not have any rights because of the absence of Autonomy and rationality" is correct following Kantian ethics?
This is very helpful !! Thank you.
Glad it was helpful, thanks for watching.
THIS IS SO GOOD. THANKS
You're welcome. Glad you like the content :)
So the long short of it all is that your 'good will' is defined by your definition of duty?
And that definition is the culprit for your choices?
umm, let me call him for u
there must be a balance between kantian ethics and utilitarianism. goodwill is practicality. if everyone practiced goodwill to one another, they would see the dying person on the street and simply help them, because THAT is goodwill and moral duty. it is necessary for a mutually beneficial world to thrive and be sustainable. if everyone gained personal pleasure from helping others, there would be no problems in the world.
i.e. synthesis
Great content
Why do I feel that the portrait in the thumbnail is of Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi and not Immanuel Kant?
lmao the bearded guy looks like Ringo. you sure it is george and john?
Thank you! You've really helped me come to understand Kant's ethics, video form is awesome, I find it just endlessly difficult to read through the textbook and pull too much from it.
Glad to have helped :)
ARE U SKUNT
This channel is greatly underrated.
Thank you :)
Great vid! Gotta provide a bit of constructive criticism though. The guy in the purple jacket had a voice that was paaainfully monotone. Otherwise, very well done vid!
Noted, thanks for your feedback.
Nicely explained commendable 👏👏👏
Thank you, glad you enjoyed.
Excellent explanation of every lecture.....I love listening u guys..... please also make videos on ancient Greek Philosophy Ionians, milesians etc
Thank you, glad you like the content. And thanks for the recommendation, we will look into it.
well, now i dont have to read kants 16 pages glued in my textbook anymore.. thank u gentlemenn! this was good. you litterally turnd my 3 hours of reading him in to 8 min long. bravo.
Happy we could help :D
This video helped a lot! Thank you for simply breaking it down!!
You're welcome, thanks for watching.
🖤🖤🖤
This was a very good example of what is "not" right about Kantian ethics. Very informative.
Thank you.
Sooo helpful thank u so much
You're welcome :)
Very interesting, commendable ❤
Thank you for explain Kant's theory with narrative and clear understanding
You're welcome!
2:08 ... without contradiction?
Contradiction is defined in Kantian morality as an action against the rational properties (e.g.: a lie is against truth, and since trust is derived from truth, it is against trust).
WHERE'S MY ENGLISH 2B GANG? SHAWAWT! HAHAHAHAHA
Whats the importance of katian ethics?
So much useful.. A big thank you from Bangladesh!
A pleasure, glad you enjoyed.
Thanks for helping me to write my philosophy assignment on Kant moral theory.
A pleasure, good luck in the assignment.
Very interesting
Thanks
Thank you for this! So helpful and very concise.
You're welcome, thanks for watching.
Great job
Thank you.
When it comes to the axe. No according to Kant you should make a moral principle around the idea of the axe and create a maxim around it the guys not a moron he’s a genius
This dick made up the never lie that’s not what he says
His point is to be your own legislature
Very very well put. Ty!
Grateful for the accessible information. Ty
You're welcome :)
Thankyouuu for this video!!! :))
You're welcome, thanks for watching.
Best video to explain this topic!! Thankyou so much
A pleasure, thank you for watching.
excellent video, thank you.
You are welcome!
You guys are the best, thank you!
You're welcome :D
Kantian presents a slippery slope argument.
Not really
@@lights473 It is flawed though.
Cool beyond comprehension.
Thanks :)
Wow, thumb up , this is so cool
Thank you!
You guys put up excellent stuff!
Thank you
Awesome videos! helped a lot
Thank you, glad it helped :)
I ❤ PHILOSOPHY VIBE I ❤ IT
Thank you!
Thank you so much
You're welcome :)
Excellent video!
Thank you!
great video
Thank you!