Home | Community | Message Board


FreeSpores.com
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
Offlineshroominsmurf
enthusiast
Registered: 06/24/02
Posts: 363
Loc: Where The Good Times Are
Last seen: 1 year, 14 days
Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals
    #2645536 - 05/06/04 02:40 PM (12 years, 6 months ago)

i been doin a lil reading on kants grounding for metaphysics of morals and its a pretty tough read, im stuck on his hypothetical imperatives and categorical imperatives, hypothetical imperative is something that should be done  as a categorical  ought be done (imperatives are duties, us as rational beings have) and then he goes on to give examples of them. anyways here an excert thats got me puzzled " act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law"

we're all ends in ourself in a kingdom of ends..WTF? does that mean... my take from what i've read is that that "in general every rational being, exsists as an end in himself" so all "rational beings are called persons in asmuch as their nature already marks them out as ends in themselves ie., as somethiing whihch is not to be used erely as means and hence there is imposed there by a limit on all arbitrary use of such being which are thus objects of respect" so people are rational beings and if your not then your not rational being, only a relative value mas means and there fore called things" so this just kind has me confused a lil i tried to explain and quote some i dunno if u all actually read philosophy here or what but i figured some intelligible people could maybe explain kant. :confused:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 1 year, 10 months
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: shroominsmurf]
    #2645928 - 05/06/04 04:26 PM (12 years, 6 months ago)

Don't worry about it. No rational human can explain Kant's ramblings, because Kant isn't rational.

His turgid prose is execrably written -- possibly on purpose to attempt to obscure its content (or lack thereof). If you must read Kant in order to complete some school assignment, well... nothing you can do, I guess. But if you're reading Kant in order to come to some sort of understanding of how reality works, do yourself a favor and read some Aristotle.

Kant's worldview is not only arbitrary and unproveable, but badly written gibberish as well. Nothing of value there. Move on if you can.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,849
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 10 days, 16 hours
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: shroominsmurf]
    #2646017 - 05/06/04 04:46 PM (12 years, 6 months ago)

It sounds like Kant was a very confused person. What kind of train of thought is that? It sounds like he was attempting to use a set of higher order words without actually understanding them... all you get is incoherent shit! :shocked:

You can almost always tell how someone thinks by the way they arrange their written word. It all lies in the flow that they give the structure, but sometimes it is a fault of not understanding how to use grammar, that structure, to get your thoughts acrossed as intended. The man either had a poorly operating mind, or just didn't focus enough to get his point clear and accessible. 

Well, that is just my assumption based on the quotes you posted here in this thread, which seem to be confirmed by pinkie's remarks... maybe I should go to college and become a philosophy major, I could kick Kant's ass. :lol:

Edit: Pinkie, I love that fucking signature! "All systems which reduce, restrict, impinge upon, or eliminate freedom in any way are systems which work against life itself." Solid gold!  :laugh:

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang:
Peace. :mushroom2:


Edited by fireworks_god (05/06/04 04:48 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleJellric
altered statesman

Registered: 11/08/98
Posts: 2,261
Loc: non-local
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: fireworks_god]
    #2646028 - 05/06/04 04:48 PM (12 years, 6 months ago)

maybe I should go to college and become a philosophy major, I could kick Kant's ass.

Kant.  :lol:


--------------------
I AM what Willis was talkin' bout.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,849
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 10 days, 16 hours
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: Jellric]
    #2646045 - 05/06/04 04:53 PM (12 years, 6 months ago)

*spews incoherent, schizophrenic ramblings to confuse you so much that you give up and decide to agree with my point of view to get me to shut the hell up* :evil:

:lol:

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblebert
bodhi

Registered: 10/14/02
Posts: 2,819
Loc: state
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: shroominsmurf]
    #2646053 - 05/06/04 04:54 PM (12 years, 6 months ago)

I've tried reading Kant for a philosophy class before and was utterly lost.  I always assumed he knew what he was talking about and I was just an idiot.  :sad:


--------------------
Persons denying the existence of robots may be robots themselves.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePHARMAKOS
addict
Registered: 09/13/02
Posts: 573
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: bert]
    #2646981 - 05/06/04 08:26 PM (12 years, 6 months ago)

heres my thought on this

"act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. we're all ends in ourself in a kingdom of ends"

ok.. having read just that...

morals have no absolute basis. No one power or person can tell us what is right or wrong. Therefore, if we must follow a maxim, or moto, as to how we shall live our lives, it must be one that we would wish was a 'universal law'...

One example is the golden rule.. most of us can believe that the world would be a much better place if 'do ontu others what you would have others do ontu you" was a 'universal law'

whereas someone who believes 'look out for number one' can probably realize that the world would be a worse place if that was a universal law, therefore we should not follow that maxim for ourselves..

ya know?

and then "we are all ends in ourselves in a world of ends" this means that because there is no universal declaration of what a HUMAN should be, what MAN or WOMAN should be, and therefore it is up to each of us to decide for ourselves who we should be and how we should live.

Kant is simply saying that we must all decide for ourselves what maxims to live by, and as a general rule we should only follow those maxims if we would want them to be 'universal laws'.

he says it like an arrogant, confused dink tho
read neitchze, he says almost exactly the same thing in, oh what is, maybe aristocratic radicalism, and he says it much more clearly.

Hope that helps man
PEACE


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshroominsmurf
enthusiast
Registered: 06/24/02
Posts: 363
Loc: Where The Good Times Are
Last seen: 1 year, 14 days
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: Phred]
    #2648091 - 05/06/04 11:54 PM (12 years, 6 months ago)

oh yeah aristotle's work is great i love it, read a lot of his work also i gotta agree


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshroominsmurf
enthusiast
Registered: 06/24/02
Posts: 363
Loc: Where The Good Times Are
Last seen: 1 year, 14 days
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: shroominsmurf]
    #2648220 - 05/07/04 12:11 AM (12 years, 6 months ago)

this is what i have come up with
ends- the desires and projects we have such as the desire to be a great musician, because we are all free to pursue these ends.

kingdom of ends- and ideal kingdom where we all respect each others ends and consider all equal.

a universal law would be not to lie and always tell the truth

the will is the chooser; ie i willingly submit to whatever it takes to be what i
want with the moral law the will chooses freely to limit its own freedom, if it so wills...make sense? i think i made that clear.

treating someone as a means merely would be like treating lieing to them thus robbing them of respect.
maxim is a very strong or firm rule.
universal law is kants idea as a way to derive duties to follow, a map or a recipe presay for moral duties, think as if they apply. universal applies to everyone equally.

according to kant thats what i got from more reading what you all think?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,733
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 4 months, 12 hours
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: fireworks_god]
    #2649055 - 05/07/04 04:31 AM (12 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

sounds like he was attempting to use a set of higher order words without actually understanding them... all you get is incoherent shit!




Perhaps you just dont understand him? Im not saying I do, but it seems fairly arrogant to dismiss a mans thoughts as incoherent shit after reading a couple of quotes that you dont get.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,849
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 10 days, 16 hours
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: GazzBut]
    #2649079 - 05/07/04 05:03 AM (12 years, 6 months ago)

May I point your attention to the following:

Quote:

fireworks_god said:
Well, that is just my assumption based on the quotes you posted here in this thread, which seem to be confirmed by pinkie's remarks...




I mean, if there was anything to actually get in "rational beings are called persons in asmuch as their nature already marks them out as ends in themselves ie., as somethiing whihch is not to be used erely as means and hence there is imposed there by a limit on all arbitrary use of such being which are thus objects of respect", it could have been worded much more effectively. The quotes I read were pretty incoherent, and I feel that I wasn't all that arrogant in saying so.

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 1 year, 10 months
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: GazzBut]
    #2649086 - 05/07/04 05:12 AM (12 years, 6 months ago)

GazzBut, the only way you can know that for sure is to actually read through one of his works. It isn't worth the grief, believe me. I actually did it once with "The Critique of Pure Reason". Took me weeks, and an enormous effort of willpower.

The truth is, his writing is abominable. At first I thought it might be due to just a bad translation from the original German, but Germans have told me it's every bit as bad in the original German. He invents new terms, misuses existing terms, redefines existing terms apparently at random, contradicts himself on a regular basis, generates insanely convoluted mishmashes of run-on sentences and nests of subordinate clauses, and more.

More than one critic of Kant has suggested this obscurity is deliberately done in order to conceal the incredibly shabby and arbitrary nature of his "philosophy". I am unsure if this was his intention or if he was just an exceptionally disorganized writer in addition to being a sham "philosopher". I will admit, however, that he repeats himself enough that you can eventually puzzle out the major premises of his position through the process of elimination and comparison.

I had originally thought that by reading the work in its entirety I could get a more accurate understanding of his position. I was wrong. Reading the full work gives one no extra information on his philosophy which can't be had with much less effort by reading a good digest (or commentary or summary or whatever) by one of many competent commentators.

As I said, if you are required to read the actual work for course completion credits, there is really no way around it. But if you are interested instead in having his philosophy explained in a comprehensible manner, go to commentaries.

As I also said, though, Kant's "philosophy" isn't worth even that much effort. It bears no relation to observable reality whatsoever. It is a purely arbitrary "system" of no more worth than any other made-up "system". His premises are untestable. They must be accepted on faith.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 1 year, 10 months
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: bert]
    #2649089 - 05/07/04 05:16 AM (12 years, 6 months ago)

bert writes:

I've tried reading Kant for a philosophy class before and was utterly lost. I always assumed he knew what he was talking about and I was just an idiot.

bert, trust me on this. It is not you who is the idiot. Kant doesn't know what he's talking about. You have nothing to be ashamed of. The stuff is gibberish.

I have always been astonished (and I'm certainly not the only one) that anyone ever took this drek seriously, and even more astonished that so many people even today still do. Just one of many things about humans that baffles me.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineCather
journeyman
Registered: 02/23/04
Posts: 91
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: Phred]
    #2649116 - 05/07/04 05:44 AM (12 years, 6 months ago)

Maybe not arbitrarily disregarding a well thought of philosophers' writings because you cannot make sense of them is something we could all do and will that it would become universal law . :wink:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinedeafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: shroominsmurf]
    #2649259 - 05/07/04 08:34 AM (12 years, 6 months ago)

Reading this made me sign up just to reply...

Kant does make sense, although he does use weird turns of phrase and odd words. He is a moral obvjectivist, which means that he believes that there are solid moral facts. These facts, he claims, can be accessed using the categorical imperitive:

"act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. we're all ends in ourself in a kingdom of ends"

Sounds ridiculous, I know. What he meant was, "only do things which everybody could do"

ie. Stealing is morally wrong because if everyone stole, the world wouldn't work.

Lying is wrong, because if everyone lied the world wouldn't work.

Taking mushrooms once a month is morally acceptable, because it is possible that the world could still function if everyone did so.

When he says that you should treat people as ends, it simply means don't use people as a means to your own ends.

Kant's theory is highly impractical, as it rules out lying in ALL cases, regardless of the consequences. My take on it is that his theory is a "wouldn't it be good if..." - his idea of a perfect, but unattainable world.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,733
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 4 months, 12 hours
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: Phred]
    #2649269 - 05/07/04 08:45 AM (12 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

GazzBut, the only way you can know that for sure is to actually read through one of his works.




Thanks for reiterating my original point! Having not read the guys stuff I cannot judge him at this time. Judging by you review I wont be doing that anytime soon!


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,733
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 4 months, 12 hours
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: fireworks_god]
    #2649345 - 05/07/04 09:56 AM (12 years, 6 months ago)

Well obviously taking a few lines out of a context makes it hard to understand a complex philosophy, regardless of its merit!

Peace


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinetezcatlipoca
but you can callme tez

Registered: 10/26/03
Posts: 73
Loc: nl, canada
Last seen: 10 years, 30 days
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: shroominsmurf]
    #2650032 - 05/07/04 03:22 PM (12 years, 6 months ago)

i have read and studied the grounding. the excerpt that you've asked about is just an fancy way of saying to act in such a way that this action can be moral and just under any circumstances.

a maxim is the principle behind an action.

a universal law is exactly what it sounds like.

hope that helps a bit. it's been a while since kant.

p.s. yeah, deafpanda knows.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/10/99
Posts: 12,756
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 1 day, 4 hours
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: shroominsmurf]
    #2651858 - 05/08/04 12:26 AM (12 years, 6 months ago)

I don't know about these other guys, but Kant's insight into the 'Noumena' and 'Phenomena' of existence is profound and will always remain with me. He is the founder of modern Existentialist thought, or at least Existential theology. His recognition of such existential malaises as 'despair,' and its impossibility in a faith-filled mind forms a bridge between philosophical and Christian theological thought. I rather liked 'Fear and Trembling: The Sickness Unto Death,' and unfortunately I cannot really remember reading 'A Kierkegaard Anthology' which I obtained on May 9, 1974 and 'Purity of Heart: Is to Will One Thing' which I dated May 1, 1977, but Soren was definately into the non-rational state of faith in GOD, and seems to have had a grasp of faith as a high contemplative state of being, so maybe give the ol' Dane a chance.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshroominsmurf
enthusiast
Registered: 06/24/02
Posts: 363
Loc: Where The Good Times Are
Last seen: 1 year, 14 days
Re: Kant's Grounding for the metaphysics of Morals [Re: deafpanda]
    #2659003 - 05/10/04 03:15 AM (12 years, 6 months ago)

I Couldn't of said it better myself, I asked and then i read it over again and then it made more since but i realise with kant you have to go with his flow when reading and not read to deep otherwise you'll find yourself lost, I think kant's a great philosopher, hes got good ideas, maybe not quite the style of which I would have or take, but none the less he is fairly famous (reason for studying his work). and he's got some good stuff even though he is <insert your downer> a lot of other philosophers refer to his work in arguements and such. just good to know the work even if someone things bad of it. I find all philosophy interesting weather the guys a TWACK or not. twacks know shit sometimes to. albert einstien is a basic example of that. not necissarily a twack but you know what i mean.

deafpanda. good to hear that i inspired you to join our community Welcome. feel free to pm me anytime. nice to have another intelligible person here!
Quote:

deafpanda said:
Reading this made me sign up just to reply...

Kant does make sense, although he does use weird turns of phrase and odd words. He is a moral obvjectivist, which means that he believes that there are solid moral facts. These facts, he claims, can be accessed using the categorical imperitive:

"act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. we're all ends in ourself in a kingdom of ends"

Sounds ridiculous, I know. What he meant was, "only do things which everybody could do"

ie. Stealing is morally wrong because if everyone stole, the world wouldn't work.

Lying is wrong, because if everyone lied the world wouldn't work.

Taking mushrooms once a month is morally acceptable, because it is possible that the world could still function if everyone did so.

When he says that you should treat people as ends, it simply means don't use people as a means to your own ends.

Kant's theory is highly impractical, as it rules out lying in ALL cases, regardless of the consequences. My take on it is that his theory is a "wouldn't it be good if..." - his idea of a perfect, but unattainable world.




Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Are morals subjective?
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 3,371 35 04/24/03 07:58 AM
by MarkostheGnostic
* what motivates you to act morally?
( 1 2 all )
MrBump 2,099 29 12/16/04 01:39 PM
by DoctorJ
* Determinism & Objective/Subjective Morality TinTree 2,036 13 01/24/05 12:34 PM
by shroomydan
* can you prove the existence of absolute, objective morality?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
Anonymous 12,118 157 12/21/04 08:31 AM
by deafpanda
* What is the opposite position to moral relatavism? Moonshoe 762 6 03/26/06 03:25 PM
by EternalCowabunga
* Determinism and Morality All We Perceive 1,346 13 09/26/07 05:27 PM
by SneezingPenis
* Karma = objective morality
( 1 2 all )
deafpanda 2,710 30 01/12/05 02:46 AM
by fresh313
* Has Kant experienced 'suchness'?
( 1 2 all )
Patisotagami 1,685 22 09/11/08 09:17 PM
by Boots

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Diploid, DividedQuantum
1,126 topic views. 0 members, 7 guests and 15 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Shroom Supply
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.103 seconds spending 0.003 seconds on 14 queries.