Re: Kant on human differences

"Michael Gordge" <mikegordge@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:1187315401.306401.316980@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Aug 17, 12:11 am, Scott H <zinites_p...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Kant's Categorical Imperative is, "Act only on the maxim that can
>> become through your will a universal law of conduct." For example,
>> lying is wrong, because if everyone lied, it would defeat the very
>> purpose of trust.
>
>
> So would tell the armed pedophile where your kids are hinding?
>
> You would tell a rapist where your wife and daughter were hiding
> because lying is wrong?
>
> You would tell the armed thug (e.g. the taxman) about the treasure you
> found buried in the back yard, that he would have no idea about,
> because lying is wrong?

This is of course a central problem with Kant.  OTOH, to imply that
Kantian 
ethics requires no thought - or has no way of getting around this problem,

is not correct, either.
>
> Kantians dont think, so what's new?

If "Kantians" are unable to understand the goals towards which Kant was 
working (and his own self-admitted limitations in thought), that's a 
problem.  No one should "be a Kantian."

However, everyone should consider how they might solve ethical problems.


>
> Hint, dopey, truth is a virtue NOT owed to the leftist s*** who choose
> to act in violation of your peaceful values.

Or to rightest s*** either - which is of course, exactly why Kant thought
it 
should be a "universal" maxim.
>
> Truth is NOT a ****ing duty, idiot, its a context dependent concept.

Obviously, you believe that to be true.  And I'm guessing if you were in a

face-to-face context with the people you post to, you'd speak differently.

Boring, when a person can't solve or restate a problem any better than you

just did.

A.
>
>
> Michael Gordge
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>