Would Kant think your actions are ethical /r9k/?
Are you a moral person?
>>25283745
No, but Bentham would.
>>25283745
>moral person
Such concepts are mere spooks.
>>25283745
Honestly I've let Kant down.
He is the true robot. He never left his hometown and died a virgin as an old man, but his ethical theory was fucking awesome. It basically says that in order to find out if an act is ethical, you picture a world where everyone does that act. If that act is inconceivable (lying) if everyone did it, then you have a perfect duty not to do that act. If the world is conceivable but not desirable (charity) then you have an imperfect duty to give to charity.
Basically all of Kant's arguments are fully rational and airtight. The only argument against Kant is basically an ad hominem that says his philosophy pedant work well with human nature. WELL MAYBE HUMAN NATURE IS SHITTY AND WE SHOULD ALL LISTEN TO KANT
but seriously Kant is the shit and I need to make him proud
