Deontology & Kant's Categorical Imperative: Moral reasoning based on Duty (Philosophy of Ethics)

In this introductory lecture on Kant's Categorical Imperative, professor Galindo provides a brief comparison of this form of the philosophy of deontology, where moral reasoning is based on duty. This brief review of Kant's Categorical Imperative is from the philosophy of ethics module from professor Galindo's Introduction to Philosophy college course.
Help Support This Channel
+ / profg
Course Textbook
+Venturing into Philosophy- amzn.to/3nPnJSA
Prof G Books
+Taste of Transcendence - amzn.to/3im5BOV
+Authentic Happiness in Seven Emails - amzn.to/3oRrRCF
+The Power of Thinking Differently - amzn.to/2N8F8sB
+The Happiness Habit (ebook) - goo.gl/Yb73XS
For Speaking Engagements
+ goo.gl/N5SeKR
Follow Prof G
www.javygalindo.com
/ javywg
/ jwgthink

[@carolmcclelland4229]

Professor G, your philosophy lectures are literally the only ones I’ve been able to understand-and I’ve read a lot of notes/slides etc., and watched plenty of different videos from so many. But none come close to the methodical way you explain things, and the insertion of various examples, as well as the little pauses you take that allow us to absorb the material. Great job, thank you so much!

[@federalisticnewyorkians4470]

7:02, We ought to judge an action by the degree to which it progesses the actor's singular individual happiness and judge it unfavourably to the degree to which it invovles the energy of others to make.

[@federalisticnewyorkians4470]

22:53, would you not be violating your principle of loyalty?

[@justinrivera1618]

For the trolley problem I could probably talk the guy into jumping off the bridge. Some human beings are Selfless so if I impart to him the knowledge that his fatness could save everyone involved, then it’s up to him

[@federalisticnewyorkians4470]

Selflessness is a terrible philosophy it holds at its basis that Man is not worthy or capable of individual survivial and trade. That he must exist as a parasite or master. This is incorrect, and hideous.
If all Men were capable and worthy of individual happiness and survival (as they actually are), then in this case it would happen naturally as an act of humanity rather than a morally enforced duty. I am not against helping people, I do it quite often, but to make that a moral duty is to make problems the most important part of life. Without suffering, there can be no helping suffering. Selflessness holds, suffering and Man's incapability of dealing with it as its 2 false basis.

[@mikesnelling9272]

Before finding Kant's moral philosophy appealing it might be worth considering where Kant’s application of his morals led him; this not an ad hominem attack on Kant but rather to show the weakness of his moral concepts if even he could use them to come to such conclusions:
Homosexuality an “unmentionable vice masturbation to be so wrong it “exceed[s] even murdering oneself
Organ donation is impermissible and that even “cutting one’s hair in order to sell it is not altogether free from blame.
Women, servants and children “lack civil personality” and that they are “mere underlings” that have to be under the direction and protection of other individuals, thus he believed they should not be permitted to vote or take an active role in the affairs of state.
He wrote about the killing of bastards that “a child that comes into the world apart from marriage is born outside the law” and that society “can ignore its existence and can therefore also ignore its annihilation”
Finally, Kant argued for the idea of racial superiority, claiming that “humanity exists in its greatest perfection in the white race” and that Native Americans and Black Africans ‘were fit only for slavery’. And that Jews were “a nation of swindlers”
Kant: The Metaphysics of Morals and Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View