Ask a pure Kantian anything.
>>7456443
you have some jews (or aryans if you're from /pol/) in your basement. A man comes to your door...
>>7456451
"Where is zee joooz?"
Your response, OP?
>>7456443
but seriously how do you determine what the maxim of your action is let alone whether its universalization is coherent
>>7456443
are you looking forward to fucking yourself?
What is your stance on the issue of sensibility and understanding? What is privileged in regard to sensibility to understanding, especially in regard to the B. Deduction vs. A deduction? What is your response to those who conceive of a sensible understanding like other German Idealists? What is your criticism of those who are critical of the distinction between appearance and reality?
>>7456443
how does one determine the truth of a synthetic apriori proposition
>>7456443
what do you do to keep chaste?
I'm the Creating Nothing. Nice spooks man.
>>7456451
If the laws of physics were used to make weapons of mass destruction, would that make them untrue?
>>7456474
The point isn't you consenting to tell the person is false, but that it's an intuitively bad consequence. Of course you can always just say that you don't care and are obliged to follow the categorical imperative. Which is the point of a limit case, to drive the mandates against your other moral commitments.
>>7456490
The point of the limit case is to imagine the worst possible world for humans. We can imagine much worse scenarios if we wanted to. We see the world this way and feel despair in the face of it. But this does not turn the good into bad.
Really, the point of virtue is to bring about the best possible world for humans. How do you plan to bring about this world by being immoral?
>>7456457
One at a time. And rephrase the question about sensibility and understanding.
>>7456518
The world of that case is only extremely problematic if you're a Kantian though; anyone else would see no conflict and simply lie.
>>7456525
You got confused. The "extremely problematic" part is the murderer. Respond with that in mind.
>>7456539
The murderer isn't problematic if you lie to him.
>>7456451
I am Aryan and apparently I'm keeping Aryans in my basement that the man at my door wants to kill but he doesn't want to kill me for some reason? This is ridiculous.
>>7456547
they're just people he doesn't like personally
>>7456544
Murder isn't problematic?
The key here is that it's the murderer who is precipitating this event.
And also you must remember the murderer is a rational being, someone like yourself. We're not talking about a runaway train here but another person. You cannot lie to a stone. What makes it wrong is that you must lie to another human.
>>7456544
That's his doing though, not mine. :^)
>>7456557
No one gets murdered if you lie; in fact the person's only a murderer if you're abide the imperative, that's the whole point.
>>7456566
So a world where everyone wants to murder but is prevented from doing so is still a good world, in your opinion?
>>7456557
are you trying to say that if you lie it's his responsibility?
>>7456572
Definitely not, but in the example not everyone wants to murder: one person wants to stop a murder and one person wants to murder.
>>7456574
An example can be extended much farther while remaining the same example. Imagine two murders, and so on. It makes no difference.
And of course in reality we know that it is more than just one person who wants to murder. We know that many people desire to and do commit murder every day and many, many more desire it but never do.
We are asking if it is a better world where they do or where they don't.
>>7456460
Browse /lit/ desu senpai
How much will my happy meal cost?
>>7457319
kek
