View Single Post
Old 01-06-2010, 05:02 AM   #114
purifier's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: DisneyLand
Posts: 725
LF Jester 
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
It doesn't mean the same thing. In a majority of situations it gets you to the same point, but that isn't the same.
Actually, the more I look over Kant's "Categorical Imperative" the more that I see a differance between the two. And it's even acknowledge in this quote from Wikipedia:

" The Golden Rule
It is often said that the Categorical Imperative is the same as The Golden Rule. In the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals Kant states that what he is saying is not the same as the Golden Rule; that the Golden Rule is derived from the categorical imperative with limitations. Under the Golden Rule many things cannot be universal. A criminal on the grounds of the Golden Rule could dispute with judges or a man could refuse to give to charity, both of which are incompatible under the universality of the categorical imperative. Kant makes this point when arguing that a man who purposefully breaks a promise is immoral
." (Wikipedia)

So your right, it really doesn't mean the same thing. And the "golden rule" is more like a "you scratch my back and I'll scratch your back" definition.

Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
The "golden rule" has problems that the categorical imperative does not.
Okay. Can you give me some examples from your own point of view, as to why the "golden rule" has problems.

Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
That someone needs to make a modicum of effort to wrap their head around the categorical imperative doesn't strike me as being a very good excuse to reject it.
Well now don't get me wrong. I wasn't trying to imply, in my earlier statement, that it should be rejected or ignored. But that it might be a little hard to comprehend for some individuals, that's really all that I was indicating. And I don't see any harm at trying to read and understand it, I did, but any individual who does (and can understand it's concept's) should be able to make there own judgement about it; and whether it's right for them or not, etc.

Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
And it does, via the categorical imperative

...which, I believe, brings us right back to where we started
Yep, agreed, only I say...via "The Golden Rule".

Originally Posted by Achilles View Post

May I offer some suggested reading? I found these books to be very illuminating.

The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason
Why I Am Not A Christian And Other Essays On Religion And Related Subjects

Thank you. I'm going to take look at these and I think one of them might be in my local library. The first book you suggested looks really interesting too.

Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
I see where you're come from now. Secular humanism does indeed promote reason and critical thinking, however I was not aware that they were so blantant in their committment to science. Thank you for pointing that out.
Lol. Well there ya go, another mystery solved. I'm glad we were able to figure that out, I was starting to get confused too.

Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
The glib answer is "yes"

The slightly more detailed response might sound like this:

Drawing a conclusion without the rigorous application of reason and doubt is the exact same things a choosing an "answer" arbitrarily (i.e. because it sounds pretty, makes you feel good about the world, etc).

If something is "unexplained", then why not simply acknowledge that it's "unexplained"? If I encounter something that I don't know, I don't feel compelled to fabricate an answer or accept someone else's supernatural "explanation". I try to find the actual answer, and if I find one, great. If I don't, then I try my best to get over it.

Well once again Achilles we are in agreement, except I don't think I could or would get over it. I gotta keep searching for the real answer, that's just me, the truth is out there somewhere. ( Now I know I made a bad X-Files joke, but I really believe it is.)

purifier is offline   you may: