Philosophy 300
Kant’s Categorical Imperative
Have you ever stopped to think what is morally accepted or better yet to consider what’s ethical? From birth we are taught from our parents what’s our understanding of “wrong” from “right”, but have you ever question your authority? By authority I mean your parents, family, social background or even the law or better yet our own government? Have you ever sat down and took into consideration that someone in Russia might be taught other wise of what “wrong” and “right” is? Most people now a days think that what’s morally correct to them is everyone’s mutual taught. This may be or not be the case. I agree with Emanuel Kant and his book Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Moral. What’s morally accepted to you should be accepted every where don’t you think? In this I agree 100%, morality is a matter of deontology which comes from the Greek word dein meaning duty. (Introducing Philosophy, Solomon) Reason also plays a big role; one role that it plays is that is capable of telling us what to do as well as how to do it. Feeling never ever plays a main part in what’s universally ethical as we discuss in class several times. Picture this, if feelings would rule or every taught and action then this world would be a madmen’s place. Now this brings us on to Mill’s Greatest happiness principle. An argument countering my beliefs of a universal concept of morality is that for the sake of the greater being its okay to violates someone’s right to live it can be as drastic as that. I supplely state that this idea or theory is similar to the idea of Sophistry which Socrates counters in Plato’s book The Last Days of Socrates in the dialogue Euthyphro. Sophistry is using persuasive rhetoric to achieve what you ultimately desire which are some form of the big three money, power, and love. So basically if you can convince a whole nation that you are indeed superior to a minority group so there rights are not consider as important as...