4 ms·
A good point, but (a) this merely sounds like a modification of the golden rule: do unto all others, without exception, as you would have done unto you, and (b)
by hliyan 1mo ago
A good point, but (a) this merely sounds like a modification of the golden rule: do unto all others, without exception, as you would have done unto you, and (b) the rule isn't an end in itself because the end lies behind the "should" (e.g. why should someone not lie to me).
- aidenn0 1mo agoI am by no means an apologist for Kant, but his ethics are clearly deontological, not consequentialist. He categorically rejected applying empiracism to ethics. Again, my memory is fuzzy, but I believe that Kant further argues that ethical rules are fixed, since any rational actor properly reasoning from first principles would eventually land on the same set of rules. It should not be surprising that contemporary ethical systems yield similar results in everyday situations because nobody will get published with their ethical theory of "why you should murder at least one innocent person per day."