>To ground morality in pure reason and avoid rationalization, you must adopt the categorical imperative>The above point is a hypothetical imperativeWas he, dare I say it, a mouthbreathing retard? How did anybody take this guy seriously?
>>18531933>Was he, dare I say it, a mouthbreathing retard?He is the backbone of your ethics, sit down bitch
>>18531935Doubt it. I am able to lie unlike this hypochondric bedwetting pussy.
>>18531958Tell me about your achievements
>>18531933>How did anybody take this guy seriously?The same way they take most Western philosophers seriously - they bought an algorithm where natural participative understanding was dying. Discoursive reasoning has a secondary role in ethics, the primary driver is a sense of holiness, a sense of inherent value. As this understanding got weaker and weaker, we supplemented it with theoretical constructs like lists of individual "values" and various methods to reduce the good to utility (utilitarianism) or to conformity to perceived laws (deontology). We supplemented dying intuition with raw discoursive reason and Kant's categorical imperative is one of the boldest step towards turning ethics into an algorithm altogether. You could have a German drown in his sleep... a complete algorithmic systematization of intuition would still be the wetter dream. And we all bought it.
>>18532017I destroyed this niggas life's work just by applying some basic logic. By the way, have you noticed how you have no counterarguments besides seething? I'll take that as a concession.
>>18531933based kant hated homosexual and drug users
