5 ms·
Lmfao this is so wrong it's absurd. The categorical imparative is absolutely supposed to be the antithesis of consequentialism. It is an implementation of deon
by Der_Einzige 7y ago
Lmfao this is so wrong it's absurd.
The categorical imparative is absolutely supposed to be the antithesis of consequentialism. It is an implementation of deontology. Deontology comes about as an attempt to escape consequentialism
The fact that it breaks down back into consequentialism is as a result of deontology being not actually different from consequentialism
- mech1234 7y agoI think you're wrong in ways that are difficult to untangle. To give an example of an obviously flawed deontology, "Never swim within 30 minutes after eating" is a deontological rule. Many experienced swimmers (or eaters) know that this is a rule that can be broken safely, and choose not to follow it. Not to say that better or more complicated rules don't exist. The 10 Commandments are a deontological system, and are not identical to consequentialism. The contrast is- following pre-established rules, which were (hopefully) written with good outcomes in mind, vs. judging the likelihood of good outcomes on-the-fly.
- barrkel 7y agoThe 10 Commandments are a Covenant between God and his chosen people; half the Old Testament is about the consequences of breaking the covenant.