The c.i. Is not an application to the world; it is a command of reason, — Mww
That seems reasonable, but if we apply it universally then it means an adult male can marry whoever he wants. It doesn’t say anything about age or consent. Nor does it address cultural differences,
— Brett
The categorical imperative does not account for cultural differences — Echarmion
Can reason command anything? — Brett
Because isn’t reason a universal human faculty and from that comes the ability to choose between possible outcomes? — Brett
Proper morality does not choose between outcomes — Mww
Are we as a society moving away from morality to ideology?
Are morality and ideology different.
Is the categorical imperative an ideological concept? — Brett
Where an ideology is based and develops from a moral position it seems to me that the moral has been drawn into service of the idea. Which means it’s no longer a choice to be made by the individual but virtually a maxim to live by. If the choice is no longer made by the individual then that person is no longer free and if they are not free to choose between to alternative outcomes then they are not capable of making a moral position. — Brett
It seems to me that the one thing we all have in common is reason. Reason cannot very according to culture, can it? There are no degrees of reason like skin colour for instance. — Brett
My query is that if one should be able to marry whoever one wants, and that is a universal maxim, is it moral if it involves marriage between an adult and a child in a culture that approves of it? — Brett
In this I regard the child as not having a choice. — Brett
But an ideology never actually has complete control over your thoughts. Ideologies don't permanently turn people into zombies. — Echarmion
In that case, you have found a contradiction. The maxim that everyone should marry who they choose, including children, includes a contradiction because it robs the children of that very choice. It cannot be universalised and hence is not moral. — Echarmion
So the proof of the moral rests in the absurdity of the contradiction? — Brett
So, if anything I would reframe the question in terms of the Kantian categorical imperative: what if one chooses to have relationships with others but abandoning the whole idea of marriage? — Jack Cummins
Part of our reason is the ability to choose between two possible outcomes. — Brett
That’s what makes us free, as opposed to animals. — Brett
Being free we can make a moral choice. We can make the wrong one as well. If C.I. is at the command of reason then why the wrong choice? — Brett
How can the idea of moral actions based on C.I. work in this age? — Brett
It works for me. — Brett
My understanding of the CI is "do any action if and only if you think everyone in the world would not disbenefit from it, even if all and everyone did the same action."You're arguing against The Golden Rule, not the CI. They are not one in the same. — creativesoul
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.