Kunt

[Anonymous No.14167421]

>German philosopher Immanuel Kant devised an argument from morality based on practical reason. Kant argued that the goal of humanity is to achieve perfect happiness and virtue (the summum bonum) and believed that an afterlife must exist in order for this to be possible, and that God must exist to provide this.
How could one man be so autistically coherent in his Critique of Pure Reason while holding retarded beliefs like this?

[Anonymous No.14167425]

Those beliefs were only regulative for Kant. All we know is that we do innately believe those things, in the immortality and unity of our soul, in the ultimate goodness of nature, and in the moral duty to help one another create the best world possible for ourselves. Those are implanted in us as the natural conclusions of our reason, which tends toward unity, harmony, and goodness as regulative principles guiding our judgments.

[Anonymous No.14167427]

>>14167421
You are mentally handicapped

[Anonymous No.14167430]

>>14167421
>autistically coherent
Cope harder bitch or sumbit

[Anonymous No.14167440]

>>14167430
Could a friendly nigger translate this post?

[Anonymous No.14167562]

>>14167421
>Goal of humanity to achieve perfect happiness
isnt this just what Atheist Utilitariantards believe?

[Anonymous No.14167567]

>>14167425
Oh, do we know that?
Guess philosophy is solved.

[Anonymous No.14167575]

>>14167425
Ben Stiller has joined the chatroom

[Anonymous No.14167580]

>>14167575
Kant would be totally opposed to that. If anything the opposite critique is the pertinent one, which is that he's a crypto-Platonist and crypto-Christian. He's saying that Christian and platonic values are self-evident and built into our souls.

[Anonymous No.14167583]

>>14167562
And Gnostics.
The links are calvinism and sabbateanism.
Another branch of the tree argues for the simple perfectioning of society through the malleability of human nature.
Marx derives from there, telling marxists that they're basically calvinists is the perfect way to make them seethe.
If only human nature really was "malleable"

[Anonymous No.14167600]

>>14167583
I am Gnostic (Though closer to Neoplatonic) and I dont believe that. The meaning of life for me is to escape from the Samsara.
And morality to me boils down to doing to others as you would have them do to you

debating "objective" morality is ultimately pointless

[Anonymous No.14167601]

>>14167425
>Those beliefs were only regulative for Kant. All we know is that we do innately believe those things, in the immortality and unity of our soul, in the ultimate goodness of nature, and in the moral duty to help one another create the best world possible for ourselves. Those are implanted in us as the natural conclusions of our reason, which tends toward unity, harmony, and goodness as regulative principles guiding our judgments.

I couldn't use better words. This is the point.

[Anonymous No.14167676]

>>14167421

[Anonymous No.14167696]

Whats the point of giving my comment if i dont get a (you)

[Anonymous No.14167772]

>>14167696
I'll give you a (you) my brother <3

[Anonymous No.14167781]

>>14167676
based

[Anonymous No.14167922]

Lots of geniuses have irrational beliefs. Nothing wrong with that. You put yourself as an arrogant pseud when you think there must be something wrong with an intelligent man for having beliefs different to yours

[Anonymous No.14167928]

>>14167425
Speak for yourself buddy

[Anonymous No.14167936]

>>14167676

[Anonymous No.14169157]

>>14167425
this but unironically.
>Kant is pretty hard on pushing this point though; almsot dogmatically though