[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 85 KB, 424x650, Immanuel Kant.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2483458 No.2483458 [Reply] [Original]

If I am right in understanding Kant's ethics:
It is wrong to hunt for sport because: A. The intentions behind it are pleasure, and if everyone acted on pleasure the world would be a terrible place. and B. If everyone everywhere hunted all the time, there would be no animals.
Correct?

>> No.2483465

The whole "if everyone did it.." argument is kinda dodgy
By that logic I shouldn't become an electrician because if everyone in the world was an electrician there would be no farmers so we'd all starve.

>> No.2483473

>>2483465
it reffers to moral choices based on its consequences... besides, it is fully hypothetical

>> No.2483474

>>2483465
But that's not a moral argument. I can see where you're coming from though, but in the case of actions like that his views can't be tried because they don't apply.

>> No.2483487

>>2483465

No because being an electrician is not an ethical matter in the first choice.

>> No.2483498

Kant said it was OK to kill a baby whose parents aren't married since he has no civil existence.

>> No.2483507

you could become an electrician out of an ethical reasons though, wanting people to have lightning, working stoves etc.

>> No.2483537

Kant's ethics is awful.

>> No.2483552

>>2483498
>An illegitimate child comes into the world outside of the law which properly regulates marriage, and it is thus born beyond the pale or constitutional protection of the law. Such a child is introduced, as it were, like prohibited goods, into the commonwealth, and as it has no legal
right to existence in this way, its destruction might also be ignored

It's from The Science of Right.

>> No.2484435
File: 15 KB, 240x240, 1326595951127.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2484435

Kant is a douche.

J.S. Mill is where it's at.

>> No.2484439

>If everyone everywhere hunted all the time, there would be no animals.

But what if that is your goal lol....Kant's ethics, not even once.

>> No.2484440

>>2483552
justifying the baby's destruction being "ignored" is not equal to justifying the destruction of the baby.

>> No.2484454

Don't know too much about Kant, but I thought he was a deontological ethicist and thus wasn't too preoccupied with outcomes, but rather duties.

>> No.2484463
File: 86 KB, 640x499, 1328667780548.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2484463

>>2484454

This

consequentialist speaking

>> No.2484464
File: 25 KB, 400x400, 1285815675433.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2484464

>>2484435
That nigga right there.
Libertarianism without the money side of it is fucking great.