Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Pheonix7719 t1_j1yc5i4 wrote

Reply to comment by sp0oky1e in /r/philosophy Open Discussion Thread | December 26, 2022 by BernardJOrtcutt

Kant has some flaws within his ideals, for example if there was a bank robbery and a security guard is hidden and you do know his position you are obligated to answer upon being asked to snitch.

I think a better way of life would atleast be to find its purpose, for if we do not have one then our existence is merely shallow and meaningless. And as such, and until one does and is convinced of objectivity (via by reason, comparaison, doubt and deductions) one must treat his fellow human the same way as he would treat himself, to respect boundaries and in that way it would be extremely peaceful.

1

hobond t1_j25hibm wrote

I think you miss a point in Kant's ethics. Snitching in that position is seen to not be considerable by majority of people. Kant acknowledges that and insists we shouldn't be proud of not snitching and accept that we lied. Basically we should stay humble and know that the ideas are definitely not less important than the actions.

1

Pheonix7719 t1_j25i11b wrote

Snitching is telling truth, yes Kant does say that an action can only be righteous when it can be used as law governing people by satisfaction of the majority for its implementation however that doesn't nullify argument that you can lie, as honesty is given as vital.

1

hobond t1_j25le9t wrote

Sorry, I've just noticed that I messed up the sentence but I guess you get the point. All I'm trying to say is that society and human nature is always on view in Kant. So the "vital" is kept as an admonition. They represent a world view.

1