He holds that most knowledge stems from experience, or a posteriori, but that there are parts that are known a priori, before experience. This sounds like it is close to Hume’s views, but there is a key difference. For Hume and others all a priori statements are analytical and all a posteriori judgements are synthetic. Kant disagrees that all a priori statements must be analytical. Hume thinks there are synthetic a priori statements, most notable in mathematics.
“Kant's criticisms of utilitarianism have become famous enough to warrant some separate discussion. Utilitarian moral theories evaluate the moral worth of action on the basis of happiness that is produced by an action.” “The utilitarian theories are driven by the merely contingent inclination in humans for pleasure and happiness, not by the universal moral law dictated by reason.” “His ethical theory has been as influential as, if not more influential than, his work in epistemology and metaphysics. Most of Kant's work on ethics is presented in two works.
But there lies a bigger picture, Kant doesn 't judge the morality of the action per se but adds whether or not the action would be more difficult to perform if everyone performed it. One way to judge the universalizability of an action is to submit it to a test--enter the contradiction and conception test which clearly defines whether or not an action is permissible. The test identifies if the action is consistent--first, the test asks to formulate a maxim and to imagine the world where everyone supports and acts on the respective maxim. The last point on the test asks whether or not the goal of the maxim could be achieved in such a world. If the answer was no, then the maxim couldn 't possibly be
The ontological argument, formulated by Anselm in his book proslogion, is written from a faith seeking understanding perspective; ontology meaning exploring the concept of all types of existence, typically Gods’. The argument is an a priori argument, this meaning that it is based on logic and is therefore deductive and an analytical argument. Therefore called the ontological argument. The ontological argument explores the existence of a necessary God. Furthermore, the argument is strong due to its key ideas, which are supported by intellectual philosophers such as Anselm, Descartes and two modern philosophers; Malcom and Plantinga.
Firstly what is a Categorical Imperative? Well according to Robert Johnson who wrote in ‘The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy’ “it is an imperative because it is a command… It is categorical in virtue of applying to us unconditionally…” so in other words it is moral actions that Kant wants us to apply universally without thought. Second is that of Maxims; Garrath Williams who also wrote in The Stanford Encyclopaedia said “the principle that unity is to be sought after none the less forms (what Kant calls) a ‘maxim’ or regulative principle or reason.”
He divides these statements into two classes. The first class he calls logical truths. He defines these as “statement[s] which [are] true and remain true under all reinterpretations of [their] components other than the logical particles” (Quine 2). The identifying characteristic of these statements is the interchangeability of non-logical particles. Assuming the logical particles remain any substitution of the remaining words will result in the statement remaining true.
I will explore the basics of Kantianism and discuss the outcome of the non-rational beings in the kingdom of ends. Immanuel Kant is one of the great enlightenment philosophers who focuses on deontological ethics; Deon being Greek for “duty” and Kantianism being the popular branch of deontological ethics. Kantianism is making ethical choices based
Semi-compatibilism is a view proposed by John Martin Fischer which only differs from compatibilism in the area of regulative control and moral responsibility. Fischer states that regulative control stems from the view of moral responsibility and is summarized as an agent who has alternative actions available to them. Agents can have guidance control even when they have no alternate possibilities available, and that moral responsibility is a product of the actual events in the causal sequence. The difference in semi-compatibilism from compatibilism is shown through the throwing out of regulative control in order to replace it with guidance control. Semi-compatibilism allows us to confidently attribute moral responsibility even if we are unsure about determinism.
Overall I would like to agree with this thesis, that the world has a beginning in time. From reading Kant’s first thesis of the first antinomy, I would agree with him. After realizing it was made on an assumption now I think it may not be true. This thesis is apart of an antinomy, so it is used for the purpose of proving “reason has a
Immanuel Kant was an significant leader in the development of modern philosophy, formulating unique inputs and contributions. Kant constantly pleaded that “the moral worth of an action is to be judged not by its consequences but by the nature of the maxim or principle that motivated the action” (Cahn and Markie, 314). When looking at Kant’s point of view and ideology, he was a leader in deontology believing the theory of the ‘right’. Kant believed that humans of this world should do the right thing for the right reason, instead of doing things for the following consequences or the rewards afterwards. When dissecting Kant’s studies, he believed in the supreme moral principle that is called the Categorical Imperative.
Philosophy in general relies on rational inquiry, logic, the theory of deductive and inductive arguments and aims to distinguish good from bad reasoning and speculations; opinions or reasoning based on incomplete information, it is also concerned with the blending of two disciplines; Science that which is provable and rational, and mystical, having a divine meaning that is beyond human understanding. Distinguishing between these two has been somewhat of a challenge, today we live in a society reason (science), and logos (reason) is the pragmatic mode ( a state of dealing with the problems that exist in a specific situation in a reasonable and logical way instead of depending on ideas and theories), of thought that enables one to function effectively in the world. People have and will always need logos to make sense of life.
Prior to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, philosophers proposed that the object was central to the theory of knowledge. How Immanuel Kant defines knowledge and how the theory arises within thy self with the aspect of time as the base form. For Immanuel Kant, knowledge exists as sensibility and understanding. Kant’s primary aim is to determine a theory of mental activity. Kant attempts
The divide between dualism and physicalism is a driving philosophical question in the discussion of the nature of mind and body. While dualists argue that the mind is an immaterial substance that transcends extension, physicalists believe that everything is physical or supervenes on the physical. A common form of physicalism is set forth in the type-identity thesis, which asserts that every type of mental state is identical to a type of physical state. The token-identity thesis is another, much narrower form which only equates an individual thought to an individual brain state. Physicalism comes to mean that there is nothing in the world that is not physical.
Rene Descartes’ argument for substance dualism (the theory that the mind and body are two separate substances) and an immaterial mind is as follows. It is conceivable for me to be a mind without a body, but not vice versa, so the mind must be independent of the body. Logically this argument is valid such as that if it is possible for a mind to be without a body then the mind must be independent. The problem with this argument is on the premise that it is conceivable to be a mind without a body. Theodore Schick criticized this argument well by asking if is truly possible to be a mind without a body.
In the First Meditation, René Descartes called upon all knowledge to be doubtful. It was a significant reflection on how reality and dreams are vague. By eliminating previous knowledge and theories, Descartes wiped out every conceivable mistake in finding new establishments of information. An indisputable outcome of questioning the senses induced the chance that God is in actuality a malevolent liar, a powerful being capable of manipulating the senses. In the Second Meditation while he contemplates the previous day, he discovered trouble in solving his questions and deemed his senses and memory conniving and faulty.