|
|
| Kant's institution of Truth-telling: Should it be put to use in modern society? |
| Yes |
|
16% |
[ 2 ] |
| No |
|
8% |
[ 1 ] |
| What the hell are you talking about? |
|
75% |
[ 9 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 7:03 pm
As some guild members should know, I'm a rather avid philosopher; anyway, seeing the threads on what religion one is, inspired me to make a thread on what philosophies one holds.
As for me (once again, another long list, with a rather complicated mix):
First and foremost I am a Cartesian Skepticism; if you want to learn more about it, I have a thread on it somewhere around here, I am also an Idealist (specifically a Berkeleyan/Russellean Idealist) A Jamesean/Piercean Pragmatist, as well as an objective-relativist; with a hint of positivism, Kantianism, and Existentialism.
If anyone wants, I can explain how I mix and match these, as well as explaining what they are.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 18, 2005 2:05 pm
Do explain, oh mighty thread-creator.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Son of Axeman Do explain, oh mighty thread-creator. All of it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 18, 2005 5:02 pm
may as well enlighten us, tho it might take several days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 18, 2005 5:29 pm
Schildkrote may as well enlighten us, tho it might take several days. hahahahaha possibly more! wink Just joking. If I may put something here, I'm thinking about mixing my beliefs (actually I already do a little although no one i live with knows) with some Judaism and Buddhism cuz I think there are some aspect in those religions that go hand-in-hand (or should at least) with Christianity. Than again, I disagree with some Christian beliefs in which that others come in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 18, 2005 6:35 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 18, 2005 7:42 pm
These days there are few people who can completely stick to one and only one religion. I dont think you have to though. I know I dont. Did I ever tell you how much I love you openminded people! lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:10 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 4:20 pm
Pragmatism is the closest to my line of thought, and still shoots a little wide. and i just cant agree with Kant on lying. anything can be justified, it's merely circumstantial. and i dont think people have a right to know the truth. when people lay hands on it, it tends to get twisted around in their favor. personally, thats worse than lying. besides, sometimes the truth could cause panics, angry reactions, and it can get pretty damned bad. i think the lies are better in the longrun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 8:19 pm
Schildkrote Pragmatism is the closest to my line of thought, and still shoots a little wide. and i just cant agree with Kant on lying. anything can be justified, it's merely circumstantial. and i dont think people have a right to know the truth. when people lay hands on it, it tends to get twisted around in their favor. personally, thats worse than lying. besides, sometimes the truth could cause panics, angry reactions, and it can get pretty damned bad. i think the lies are better in the longrun. This should be better for lying. According to Kant we should "Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become universal law." In other words, if you lie, even once, you must hold the belief that everyone else will lie, because we are trying to act in accordance with a universal law. If you lie, you are making an action, that action must be one that can make a universal law. Lying cannot make a universal law. As soon as the statement "everyone lies" is true, it is necessarily false. Someone must have said it, and, since everyone lies, the statement is false. As soon as the statement is false, it is false. Therefore, lying is bad; as it leads to a paradox, and not a universal law (i.e. maxim).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 30, 2005 1:21 pm
chaoticpuppet Schildkrote Pragmatism is the closest to my line of thought, and still shoots a little wide. and i just cant agree with Kant on lying. anything can be justified, it's merely circumstantial. and i dont think people have a right to know the truth. when people lay hands on it, it tends to get twisted around in their favor. personally, thats worse than lying. besides, sometimes the truth could cause panics, angry reactions, and it can get pretty damned bad. i think the lies are better in the longrun. This should be better for lying. According to Kant we should "Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become universal law." In other words, if you lie, even once, you must hold the belief that everyone else will lie, because we are trying to act in accordance with a universal law. If you lie, you are making an action, that action must be one that can make a universal law. Lying cannot make a universal law. As soon as the statement "everyone lies" is true, it is necessarily false. Someone must have said it, and, since everyone lies, the statement is false. As soon as the statement is false, it is false. Therefore, lying is bad; as it leads to a paradox, and not a universal law (i.e. maxim). because i lie under certain circumstances doesnt mean everyone would, and the belief in a universal law seems ridiculous to me. how could everything have one law they follow, unless it's a very broad or complicated law. and on the "everyone lies" statement, there are exceptions to every law, and that happens to be one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 30, 2005 7:09 pm
Schildkrote because i lie under certain circumstances doesnt mean everyone would, and the belief in a universal law seems ridiculous to me. how could everything have one law they follow, unless it's a very broad or complicated law. and on the "everyone lies" statement, there are exceptions to every law, and that happens to be one. Universal law means that it applies to everyone. There is only one universal law that any human knows of; this is the "cogito ergo sum," offered by Descartes. Everytime one thinks of it, it is necessarily true, otherwise, it could not be thought of in the first place. It is a universal law. What Kant is trying to do with the 'acting in a way so that it becomes universal law," is trying to set up the background for "treat others the way you want to be treated." Your right, simply because you lie doesn't mean others do, but, in the context of Kant's philosophy, it does; you are trying to make a universal law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 3:29 pm
because its thought doesnt mean its true! because i think im god doesnt mean i am. because i think a bullet isnt real wont stop it killing me. and "universal law" cant exist if all people are unique. one might be a liar, but another might cut out their tounge to avoid it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 4:47 pm
Schildkrote because its thought doesnt mean its true! because i think im god doesnt mean i am. because i think a bullet isnt real wont stop it killing me. and "universal law" cant exist if all people are unique. one might be a liar, but another might cut out their tounge to avoid it. Want to know something ironic? Your statement about universal law not existing, is in fact a universal law. So, do you care to take that back? What about death, is death not a universal law? Secondly, try and prove the universal law "I think therefore, I am" is wrong. Lastly, prove that you yourself are not god, prove a bullet can kill you; do so without the presupposition that this reality is real. Do so that it will hold true for when this reality is also false; and finally make sure it applies to everyone. In other words, make it a universal law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:18 pm
i dont think id survive some of those tests...>.<
but i meant that the lying bit cant be universal. i understand that some things are, but that isnt one of them, and because i do something doesnt mean others will too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
