Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gao seng who wrote (30303)	9/30/2001 4:25:24 AM
From: average joe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

The Kantian categorical imperative is beyond any theoretical analysis. What the heck does that mean?" It means it is way too deep, you would not understand, this is how the all mystics operate to entice a following. A Taleban fighter does not challenge a decree of the Mullah Omar and make no mistake Kant is every bit as dangerous as the Taleban. portal.telegraph.co.uk St. Bill and his cohort Neo don't understand Kant either. I.e. people of average intelligence read it and rather than seeing through the idiocy of his philosophy feel inadequate and say to themselves "wow, I did not understand one word, it must really be deep". Kant would say they have an imperfect experience and Kant is absolutely right on that point. Melody boys, speculating on a speculator...

To: gao seng who wrote (30303)	9/30/2001 4:30:59 AM
From: average joe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

More on Kant here and the King of philosophy Aristotle. newadvent.org -in particular read the last paragraph where it states- Some philosophers and theologians have held that the objective data on which the Catholic religion is based are incapable of proof from practical reason, will, sentiment, or vital action -Compare that with the glib statement from St. Bill- The Kantian categorical imperative is beyond and theoretical analysis. How does he know? Who told him that? Why does he believe that? Can he explain it? NO, of course he can't explain it, it is way too deep and he does not understand it either. The Catholic faith and Kant are based on mysticism.

To: gao seng who wrote (30303)	9/30/2001 9:07:53 PM
From: St_Bill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I tried accessing the link you forwarded and it crashed my computer. you asked what the heck it meant to say that "The Kantian Categorical Imperative is beyond any theoretical analysis."? I have no idea. However, as I said before, much better Kant scholars than I have been trying to figure him out all their lives, so maybe what you've quoted makes some sense. But, as I recall, Kant would find such a statement hysterical since that's what he was trying so hard to do -- provide a theoretical, fundamental, Newton-like analysis of ethics. So to say that the fruits of his efforts admit of no theoretical analysis is quite the joke, even though it might be true. And, if I understand you correctly, your'e explaining that Kant's solution was that ethics hinged on freedom and freedom upon rationality. this I think is pretty much right. In other words, we can't be responsible for our actions (and hence moral) if we're not free and we can't be free if our thoughts or emotions enslave us with ulterior motives. Reason is the key, though you'll have to read and understand his Critique of that activity if you want to know what he meant.It's a big, thick, turgid book. Oh god. Anyway... That's why we have to ignore the consequences of our actions in our assessment of their morality. If we focus only upon the consequences our motives, our freedom can too easily can be polluted by our all too personal desires for particular results. Here are the hoodlums you refer to? And here's why some argue that, if Kant is right, since as humans we'll never escape those hoodlums stealing away our freedom, we can never be entirely moral. How's that?