Kant's Categorical Imperative | Highlights Ep.46
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ส.ค. 2022
- Click this link to enroll in this FREE online course today and learn more about the ideas and philosophers who have shaped the West, online.hillsdale.edu/landing/...
In this Highlight from Hillsdale College’s FREE online course, “Introduction to Western Philosophy,” Dr. Nathan Schlueter explains the categorical imperative--Immanuel Kant's famous teaching on morality. Click this link to enroll in this FREE online course today and learn more about the ideas and philosophers who have shaped the West.
Support Hillsdale College: secured.hillsdale.edu/hillsda...
Visit our website: hillsdale.edu
Learn from our online courses: online.hillsdale.edu
Read Imprimis: imprimis.hillsdale.edu/
Undergraduate programs: www.hillsdale.edu/information...
Graduate School of Statesmanship: www.hillsdale.edu/academics/g...
Graduate School of Government: dc.hillsdale.edu/School-of-Go...
Listen to Hillsdale Dialogues Podcast: blog.hillsdale.edu/online-courses
Hillsdale College is an independent institution of higher learning founded in 1844 by men and women “grateful to God for the inestimable blessings” resulting from civil and religious liberty and “believing that the diffusion of learning is essential to the perpetuity of these blessings.” It pursues the stated object of the founders: “to furnish all persons who wish, irrespective of nation, color, or sex, a literary, scientific, [and] theological education” outstanding among American colleges “and to combine with this such moral and social instruction as will best develop the minds and improve the hearts of its pupils.” As a nonsectarian Christian institution, Hillsdale College maintains “by precept and example” the immemorial teachings and practices of the Christian faith.
The College also considers itself a trustee of our Western philosophical and theological inheritance tracing to Athens and Jerusalem, a heritage finding its clearest expression in the American experiment of self-government under law.
By training the young in the liberal arts, Hillsdale College prepares students to become leaders worthy of that legacy. By encouraging the scholarship of its faculty, it contributes to the preservation of that legacy for future generations. By publicly defending that legacy, it enlists the aid of other friends of free civilization and thus secures the conditions of its own survival and independence.
The density of Kant’s work required me to read it at least two to three times to really parse out everything. I really enjoyed this short of Kant and his imperative.
When asked if one were hiding any one, merely say "I Kant answer that."
I highly recommend taking the online course from Hillsdale, "Introduction to Western Philosophy."
Thank you for articulating this point so well. It was a tough one. This is no excuses, radical honesty. I’d like to learn more about this Kant guy.
[raises hand] Lowly public school graduate here, but in regards to 1:58, if it is a Moral action worthy of esteem to sacrifice one's life to save another, how is it NOT a moral action to sacrifice one's personal devotion to a moral code to save someone by lying to the Nazi's?
Did they teach you that nazi is a pejorative term in public school?
Secondly, lying is immoral. You can't be moral by being immoral. He answered that question. Hence his statement.
If you apply the Categorical Imperative (Extrude maxim as natural law) according to the video to this situation you can infer the act is immoral.
Arg 1. Value judgments cannot be a factor in morality as they cannot be universally applied. Nazi's believe they are doing good and so does the person who's hiding Jews.
Arg 2. Using the Maxim, "Lying to get what you want is ok" is clearly not applicable as it would result in societal distrust and ultimately societal breakdown. (See current political climate)
What this video doesn't include is Kant's "Unjust constraint" argument in which the immoral act of coercion on the part of the Nazi negates the moral principle of duty from the person protecting the Jew. So, to lie to a Nazi about hiding a Jew is trumped by the demand for truth by force/threat of force and is not considered immoral.
Thank you for sharing. :)
If one doesn’t do the Moral Action, the the person will suffer guilt . To suppress the guilt the person will drink, do drugs or become more evil just to cover the guilt. Failing to do a moral act will eventually destroy the one who fails to be moral.
Extremely well said. Very complete statement. Bravo
How have gotten your knowledge?
@@whousa642 I don’t know how he knows but he knows
But how many innocent moral people will be damaged or destroyed in the meantime?
One of the basic problems of Communist "Modern Philiosophy".
I came across the Moral Imperative several months ago. Quite illuminating and required me to examine my internal self.-
If Kant thinks that making false promises in case of need is wrong because in such circumstances no one will trust each other and the society will collapse, he would be a consequentialist. The real reason is that if I universalize making false promises, the concepts of promise and trust will be meaningless, which indicates a contradiction. What makes something a "promise" is the reliance on keeping it. If it is not kept, universally, the concept itself will be in contradiction with its actuality, which is unacceptable for Kant. Don't confuse it with the consequences likely to happen.
Kant is the greatest!
Kant couldn't see the simplicity of what was under his nose.
Kant never even defines what morality is. He starts out he telling us that “there is nothing that is absolutely good except a good will”. But he never tells us he means by “good will”.
Kant very clearly defined goodwill and what it constitutes
magnifique
Kant's reciprocity is unfulfilled by the mutual extortion Smith identified as the action of capital in economy.
In short you need to practice "right action" and sovereignty within, and come to the realization that you are a autonomous being 💡
The problem with this assumption - Kant didn't take it back far enough, he had to go back to when there was a lot of grunting and pointing going on because good morals are instilled from the day you're born by the ones that care for you, and if those morals are vague the individual is more likely to waiver¿`_
Kant seems like a German variation of Can't.
Kant would have universalised the act of imprisoning the Jew and not handed them over.
Kant is misunderstood by being taken as a materialist, certainly here.
Everyone always seems to bring up this analogy and assumes that's what Kant would hand over the Jew. But this is hardly clear from his writings, and you can still be a Kantian and not never lie. It's not easy being a Kantian, but this isn't the best line of attack.
I am a veteran and you missed the entire point of your example. If those people are found, of course they are lost so they deserve no further consideration as far as this example. If they get caught, YOU are going to suffer terribly. And morality does have its masters. Just as duty, morality can not live in a vacuum. Morality is a duty you owe yourself, in your actions and treatment of others.
I may be missing something, but this sounds like an attempt to define morality completely devoid of its religious component. We don't just self govern. For example, "Thou shall not kill" has never been a thing throughout history prior to religion. I know this is just highlights on a lecture, but am I missing the point?
I think Kant became a Christian! This is just an introduction, but very useful for learning more about the thought process of many non- believers.
We are playing with broken shards already
"Thou shalt not lie is a command, it a suggestion. It is a divine command-imperative. ". Or it is a suggestion that depends on the situation and the person's ability reason(rationalize) when it is o. kay Sometimes it is okay rationalize , disobey the command against srealing, and even killing another human beings. 🤔😉
that's not the commandment. it's "don't bear false witness against your neighbor", which is a very particular kind of lie.
2nd, 2 August 2022
In the real world our ability to process morality is not the same, it's tied directly to mental habits, will power and our awareness of the situation. We rarely have such clear-cut propositions like that. That's not quite being at the edge-of-chaos, it just tends towards order by the need of simplification to create the theory.
But I get it, we have to at least define the boundaries of the problem to see the gradient of possibilities from one point to the other.
And then depending on the situation, depending on the point of view of each individual, we will plot areas within that space of how those actions were perceived by each individual.
I mean, you might as well at this point throw in other value systems and we have a multi-dimentional space.
For the indoctrinated nazi that was an immoral action to lie about the jews, since it goes against their value system.
But let me save ourselves here: Some moral systems are much more wholesome/solid than others, some systems have more consistency, less gaps and execeptions and overall lead to more positive outcomes to EVERYONE including the individual.
Of course at some places of that space there will be situations where someone saving themselves and 10 not surviving might be seen as positive or negative.
In some situations, you can't make everyone happy, and you pick the least bad of many options.
I know I'm not being precise like a philosopher, but I hope anyone reading gets the idea. i.e.: If I tell about the jews at this circustance that's a net negative, but overall not lying leads to better results since it translates better to more circumstances across more people. There is never any clear cut solution, since the world around us and our competing desires is always changing, we need as much requisite variety in the controller than there is on the system being controlled.
Most times certain tactics (i.e. not lying) leads to better results. The lives of people are above our tactic to not lie, it would be ineffective to our greater values, therefore the agent doesn't use that tactic to save those lives.
Possibly?
Kant's ethical analysis is clearly wrong, by reductio. The fundamental ethical principle, I think, should be 'the lesser of two evils', or on some occasions, 'the greater of two goods'.
What if everybody?
Was this edited and stitched together? Seems very disjointed. Maybe just trying to cram too much into a short clip.
I wonder how many people ratted out Jews to Nazis simply because they believed Kant's garbage.
The point raised initially about hiding Jews from Nazi’s was never revisited. This left a gaping hole in my understanding of Kant’s Categorical Imperative as you have attempted to explain it. This is both philosophically and practically irresponsible, and thus, disturbing to me.
Konvoluted Kant. He made no sense.
He's actually a genius, a philosopher's philosopher. But he is tortuously difficult to follow, being such a bad communicator (Aspergers', perhaps). Apparently his non-philosophical writing is pretty clear, and it's better in the German. But he's wrong about the lie issue.
The Nazi guard vs Jew-hider example is poor. It is "categorically imperative" to resist tyranny and help protect the innocent.
Perhaps those WW2 era silent Germans were an example of this professor's interpretation of Kant. Herd mentality to merely fit in.
The funny thing is that you gave yourself the answer in your own response. The correct moral action would have been to not lie, and also to "resist" the guards if they attempted to arrest those inside, in other words, to "protect the innocent". The example is perfect 👌
@@belisariussmith9095 "Resist" the NAZI guards??? That would be suicidal and letting down the Jews you were meant to protect., further proving this to be a poor example.
By that thinking, if I was a POW, I should give the enemy EVERYTHING I know if they ask, and just "fight back".
How can I give this 1000 thumbs down.
Kant is evil and root of all of our ills today.
Monty Python taught me Immanuel Kant was a real pissant who was very rarely stable.
Why give the video a thumbs down. He is teaching you about him. If you watch the course he and others are going though most of the biggest western philosophers including Plato, Aristotle and their ideas and how they influenced the world more specifically the West. Its a great course. Don’t punish Hinsdale.
@@fsirjyy147 he is putting a good face on Kant. The professor gets 1000 thumbs down for doing a bad job. I am punishing the foolish professor.
Kant was often way too much of a Sperg for his own good.
The fact that you're chewing on what Kant would've thought about the pogrom tells me that none of you have any object permanence.
His philosophy is nothing but false dilemmas. At least Descartes believed in reality.
Kant’s categorical imperative is obviously wrong. Morality is not based on duty, maxims, laws or principles. The value of any action cannot be adequately evaluated without regard to probable consequences. Even the secular law is full of exceptions based on competing interests and values. Kant is simply wrong.
You make a lot of assumptions
@@TweezerShred Like what?
I mean your very first definition of morality is wrong. Get a dictionary 😢
a system of values, normative rules, or principles according to which intentions or behaviours are judged to be good or bad, right or wrong -
😂 I know what you are actually saying is right. I'm trolling. But how would you know besides it being categorically obvious.