Talk:CC Kant - Revision history

Nateoxford at 07:09, 3 September 2010

2010-09-03T07:09:06Z

Nateoxford at 07:08, 3 September 2010

2010-09-03T07:08:03Z

Nateoxford at 07:05, 3 September 2010

2010-09-03T07:05:37Z

Nateoxford at 06:51, 3 September 2010

2010-09-03T06:51:34Z

Nateoxford at 06:34, 3 September 2010

2010-09-03T06:34:44Z

Nateoxford: New page: ==Summary of Groundwork draft== ===Background=== The ''Groundwork'' was written 1785. Kant meant it to be a popular work explaining his formulation of the moral law and how he believes f...

2009-12-29T12:40:56Z

New page: ==Summary of Groundwork draft== ===Background=== The ''Groundwork'' was written 1785. Kant meant it to be a popular work explaining his formulation of the moral law and how he believes f...

New page

==Summary of Groundwork draft==

===Background===
The ''Groundwork'' was written 1785. Kant meant it to be a popular work explaining his formulation of the moral law and how he believes freedom is possible. A more academic, technical, and complete version is found in ''Critique of Practical Reason'', which was published in 1788.

The ''Groundwork'' is divided into three parts:
<br>1. Refinement of moral knowledge via regression from ordinary moral understanding.
<br>2. Using this moral knowledge to formulate the moral law (Kant will present three).
<br>3. A proof of freedom.

[[Contemporary Civilization|CC]] students are normally asked to read the first two parts. This is because Kant disowned the ''Groundwork'' version of the proof of freedom. Dissatisfied with it, he wrote a completely new proof of freedom in ''Critique of Practical Reason.'' Hence, modern scholars now consider the third part of the ''Groundwork'' philosophically irrelevant, and thus it is not included in the CC syllabus. If your instructor did assign the third part, he or she probably didn't know much about Kant.

===Part 1===
The point Kant is making is that people are born with basic moral truths. So in merely presenting cases, one extracts moral knowledge. You don't need a philosopher to tell right from wrong - everybody understands morality just as much as everybody else does. That's Kant's point.

What Kant does in regressing from ordinary moral understanding is give you a bunch of cases. From these cases you get a more explicit understanding of the implicit knowledge which you knew all along. In effect, he is extracting moral knowledge and hence giving the reader a more profound grasp of it.

===Part II===

===Part III===

===Glossary===
'''A priori''': something is a priori only if it ''necessarily exists'', only if it ''universally applies'', and only if it ''arises from activity of the mind.''
<br>'''Maxim''': a careful and deliberate principle of action. An example of a maxim is "I will not let anything interfere with my schoolwork." It is a principle which dictates further action.

More content and elucidation to follow. [[User:Nateoxford|Nateoxford]] 07:40, 29 December 2009 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:09, 3 September 2010
Line 57:		Line 57:
	\|If you think this is moral, you will that the needy are neither hurt nor helped. But what if ''you'' are one of the needy? In such a situation, you would will for someone to help you - a direct contradiction of the principle. So this principle ends in a contradiction, and hence cannot be universal.		\|If you think this is moral, you will that the needy are neither hurt nor helped. But what if ''you'' are one of the needy? In such a situation, you would will for someone to help you - a direct contradiction of the principle. So this principle ends in a contradiction, and hence cannot be universal.
	\|}		\|}
		+
		+
		+	==What was there before==
		+	==What is Enlightenment?==
		+
		+	Freedom of speech, thought and opinion<br>
		+	Reason, understanding<br>
		+	Courage, knowing the right thing to do (comes with obligations)
		+
		+	There was very strict ideological oppression in Prussia at the time; absolutism.
		+
		+	It is when you can dispute anything and everything.<br>
		+	But Kant is not capable of linking thought to action because that would make one a revolutionary; he is not able to link being enlightened with acting enlightened.
		+
		+	Man leaving behind his self-imposed childhood/nonage, in which he lacked responsibility/maturity.<br>
		+	Enlightenment is reaching adulthood, in which man is able to think.<br>
		+	It is an activity in the real world.
		+
		+	There is a distinction between the individual and the collective/community.
		+
		+	Becoming enlightened is easier said than done.<br>
		+	It is a gradual progress.
		+
		+	Reason is the mechanism; we all partake of reason.<br>
		+	Reason can be used in private and in public.<br>
		+	The individual is bound to the community by reason.
		+
		+	According to Aristotle, there is a distinction between potentiality and actuality. We are born with certain potentialities, such as reason. When the potentiality of reason becomes an actuality, we are enlightened.
		+
		+	There is a distinction between experience and knowledge. Kant says enlightenment comes from knowledge. He is an idealist (like Plato, with his theory of forms). The opposite is empiricism, which is the belief that in order to know, we first have to experience.
		+
		+	==Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals==
		+
		+	===Part 1===
		+
		+	Examples of <u>universal quantifiers</u>: always, all, every, never.
		+
		+	The human being can never be the means to an end. You can’t ‘use’ a person.
		+
		+	Categorical imperative: act in such a way that you should will it to be a universal law.<br>
		+	The categorical imperative is purely formal. It cannot have any content.
		+
		+	Kant's project is a Copernican revolution in the realm of the mind. [See introduction.]
		+
		+	A priori: from the first, before anything else, before experiment or experience.<br>
		+	A posteriori: after the fact.<br>
		+	Analytic: predicate is contained in the concept of the subject.<br>
		+	Synthetic: predicate adds something new to our conception of the subject.<br>
		+	Kant is interested in synthetic a priori judgments.
		+
		+	Transcendental: that which is concerned with the conditions of possibility of something else. For Kant, it is that which is concerned with the conditions of possibility of how we are supposed to act. This is not empirical.
		+
		+	p15: “I must reflect whether the matter might be handled ''more prudently'' by proceeding in a general maxim and making it a habit to promise nothing except with the intention of keeping it. But it is soon clear to me that such a maxim will still be based only on results feared. To be truthful from duty, however, is something entirely different from being truthful from anxiety about detrimental results, since in the first case the concept of the action in itself already contains a law for me while in the second I must first look about elsewhere to see what effects on me might be combined with it.”
		+
		+	According to Kant, acting from duty is the best course. Deviating from duty is evil.<br>
		+	This is a rephrasing of the Christian ‘love thy neighbor’ maxim.<br>
		+	It places a high value on life.
		+
		+	We are dealing with the conditions of possibility for ethics. It is the <u>Groundwork</u> of the Metaphysics of Morals.<br>
		+	Metaphysics is the philosophy limited to determinate objects of the understanding.
		+
		+	===Part 2===
		+
		+	Kant is the pinnacle of the Enlightenment.<br>
		+	He boiled down the Enlightenment in a nutshell.<br>
		+	The Enlightenment: we are able to gain certain truths, and we can all do this.<br>
		+	Kant did not want to leave any mystery of the human mind not illuminated.<br>
		+	He says “this is the underlying structure of the Enlightenment project”.
		+
		+	Why?<br>
		+	It is better than the middle ages.<br>
		+	Self-reliance, as promoted by Thoreau.<br>
		+	You understand the world without needing professors, priests; without the church.<br>
		+	You can improve your life/existence.<br>
		+	You have the ability to do so.<br>
		+	It changed the way we understand the world, talk to others, etc.<br>
		+	It gives people the means to be equals.<br>
		+	It’s not about knowledge, but processes. Even the Enlightenment itself is a process.
		+
		+	All this being said, Kant is not applicable to reality.<br>
		+	The reader cannot ask, how does this work?<br>
		+	Kant does not tell you how to think, what to think, or who you are.<br>
		+	He tells you how to go about, mentally, doing what you need to do.<br>
		+	He gives you a method to make informed decisions.<br>
		+	The categorical imperative does not work in reality. It justifies totalitarianism.
		+
		+	Kant is an example that theory is important. Without theory, you are a slave to the ‘real’ world.<br>
		+	Influence your own world; take things into your hands.<br>
		+	Thought does not need to produce any immediate results. But without thought, there would be nothing real.

@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 A formulation of the moral law (known famously as the "Categorical Imperative"): '''Act only on that principle that you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.'''
 ====Examples====
@@ Line 53: / Line 55: @@
 |''I will neither hurt nor help the needy''
 |No
-|If you think this is moral, you will that the needy are neither hurt nor helped.  But what if ''you'' are one of the needy?  In such a situation, you would will for someone to help you - a direct contradiction of the principle. So this is not right.
+|If you think this is moral, you will that the needy are neither hurt nor helped.  But what if ''you'' are one of the needy?  In such a situation, you would will for someone to help you - a direct contradiction of the principle. So this principle ends in a contradiction, and hence cannot be universal.
 |}

@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 In other words, to test a certain principle, we simply need to ask, ''Would it be right for ''everyone'' to ''always'' do this action in ''any'' situation?''  If you are able to answer "yes", than it is the morally correct thing to do.
-A formulation of the moral law: '''Act only on that principle that you can at the same time will that it should become a uni law.'''
+A formulation of the moral law (known famously as the "Categorical Imperative"): '''Act only on that principle that you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.'''
 ===Part III===

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 ===Part II===
-The next rational step is to attempt to formulate a moral law.  That's what Part II is about.
+The next rational step is to attempt to formulate a moral law.  That's what Part II is about.  What Kant says can actually be interpreted in different ways, but here's one way of looking at it.
 ===Part III===

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 <br>3. A proof of freedom.
-[[Contemporary Civilization|CC]] students are normally asked to read the first two parts.  This is because Kant disowned the ''Groundwork'' version of the proof of freedom.  Dissatisfied with it, he wrote a completely new proof of freedom in ''Critique of Practical Reason.''  Hence, modern scholars now consider the third part of the ''Groundwork'' philosophically irrelevant, and thus it is not included in the CC syllabus.  If your instructor did assign the third part, he or she probably didn't know much about Kant.
+[[Contemporary Civilization|CC]] students are normally asked to read the first two parts.  This is because Kant disowned the ''Groundwork'' version of the proof of freedom.  Dissatisfied with it, he wrote a completely new proof of freedom in ''Critique of Practical Reason.''  Hence, modern scholars now consider the third part of the ''Groundwork'' philosophically irrelevant, and thus it is not included in the CC syllabus.
 ===Part 1===
-The point Kant is making is that people are born with basic moral truths.  So in merely presenting cases, one extracts moral knowledge.  You don't need a philosopher to tell right from wrong - everybody understands morality just as much as everybody else does.  That's Kant's point.
+People are born with basic moral truths.  So in merely presenting cases, one extracts moral knowledge.  You don't need a philosopher to tell right from wrong - everybody understands morality just as much as everybody else does.
-What Kant does in regressing from ordinary moral understanding is give you a bunch of cases.  From these cases you get a more explicit understanding of the implicit knowledge which you knew all along.  In effect, he is extracting moral knowledge and hence giving the reader a more profound grasp of it.
+What Kant regresses from ordinary moral understanding by providing a series of examples.  From these cases you get a more explicit understanding of the implicit knowledge which you knew all along.  In effect, he is extracting moral knowledge and hence giving the reader a more profound grasp of it.
 ===Part II===
 ===Part III===