The categorical imperative

[Free Thinker]

Quote from drjekyllus:

You are completely wrong.

and you dont know your bible.

 

[3121]

Quote from drsteph:

Kant's Moral and Categorical Imperative is real.

You know it when you see it - it hits you like a ton of bricks and you are forced to action. To paraphrase Kant, when you are confronted with circumstances where the moral choice is so clearly obvious and without any controversion, you are compelled to follow it. (or reject it and be a shmuck, a destroyer, a sociopath, etc.)

The Kantian Categorical Imperative is not a small thing - its realization compells you to action. Of course, if you are living an unrealized life, that's another story. I think its a lot like a religious epiphany, minus the religion.

I've had my moment, and it was life-altering. I don't regret that choice. And it was Kant's words that I recalled as I felt compelled to act.

i'd rather do the right thing, the humanitarian thing than blindly follow 'rules' of conduct from a questionable source.

 

[drsteph]

Quote from 3121:

i'd rather do the right thing, the humanitarian thing than blindly follow 'rules' of conduct from a questionable source.

What you are suggesting is not exclusive with the moral imperative. In fact, its probably inclusive. You've just assumed that (insert religious dogma here) is the only guiding principle. I feel that presupposition is invalid.

What's not OK is to see the problem, realize the humanitarian issue, and then say, "OK. How can I turn not doing the humanitarian thing into my own personal advantage." That's active rejection of the categorical imperative & you are now a sociopath.

 

[stu]

Quote from drsteph:

Kant's Moral and Categorical Imperative is real.

You know it when you see it - it hits you like a ton of bricks and you are forced to action. To paraphrase Kant, when you are confronted with circumstances where the moral choice is so clearly obvious and without any controversion, you are compelled to follow it. (or reject it and be a shmuck, a destroyer, a sociopath, etc.)

The Kantian Categorical Imperative is not a small thing - its realization compells you to action. Of course, if you are living an unrealized life, that's another story. I think its a lot like a religious epiphany, minus the religion.

I've had my moment, and it was life-altering. I don't regret that choice. And it was Kant's words that I recalled as I felt compelled to act.

Are you aware of what Kant's Categorical Imperative is? A clue in the word Categorical.
Not modified or restricted by reservations.

You are describing something there which is not Kant's Categorical Imperative, but a subjective decision you made given known circumstances.

That is not Kant's Categorical Imperative, so from what you say, you're in danger of becoming a shmuck, a destroyer, a sociopath. Which is obviously what you seem quick to accuse others of when you deal God's Law as per Kant, but not what you would so readily intend to charge yourself with I’d wager.

 

[drsteph]

Quote from stu:

Are you aware of what Kant's Categorical Imperative is? A clue in the word Categorical.
Not modified or restricted by reservations.

You are describing something there which is not Kant's Categorical Imperative, but a subjective decision you made given known circumstances.

That is not Kant's Categorical Imperative, so from what you say, you're in danger of becoming a shmuck, a destroyer, a sociopath. Which is obviously what you seem quick to accuse others of when you deal God's Law as per Kant, but not what you would so readily intend to charge yourself with I’d wager.

3200 posts, all in politics or religion. I see that I have been suckered. And I have a very good idea of what I am speaking of - I didn't just wiki it so I could insult people.

And I never said I wasn't a shmuck. But I can see I am in good company.

(add to ignore)

 

[TheFinn]

Quote from 3121:

i'd rather do the right thing, the humanitarian thing than blindly follow 'rules' of conduct from a questionable source.

and who decides what the 'right' thing to do is?

 

[stu]

Quote from drsteph:

3200 posts, all in politics or religion. I see that I have been suckered. And I have a very good idea of what I am speaking of - I didn't just wiki it so I could insult people.

And I never said I wasn't a shmuck. But I can see I am in good company.

(add to ignore)

geez, so touchy , and completely incapable of substantiating anything you say.

Yea right, you have a good idea of what you're speaking of.

 

[Thunderdog]

Quote from nitro:

Do you adhere to it?

For those that don't know what it is, here is a simple situation:

You have a friend, let's call him Bob, whose location at this exact moment you know. Another random person, call him Billy, comes up to you and says he wants to kill Bob and demands that you tell him where he is. If you tell Billy where Bob is, he is 100 delta to die. If not, Bob forever goes unharmed. Do you tell the truth to Billy?

Not lying, according to Kant, is a fundamental principle of morality, or the 'categorical imperative'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative

Theoretically, you need not lie to save or protect Bob. You can simply refuse to answer Billy's question or participate in his enterprise in any way. However, you may wish to be armed when you do so.

 

[3121]

Quote from Thunderdog:

Theoretically, you need not lie to save or protect Bob. You can simply refuse to answer Billy's question or participate in his enterprise in any way. However, you may wish to be armed when you do so.

oh man that's beautiful

 

[trendlover]

If Bob is my friend, then I would tell Billy a false place to go find Bob. Now Billy can not hurt me, and I have time to go to Bob and tell him Billy is crazy and will murder him. Then Bob can protect himself.