Immanuel Kant says “One who makes himself a worm cannot complain afterwards if people step on him” We hope that you enjoyed this video and for more videos to help you find success and happiness using ancient philosophical wisdom, don’t forget to subscribe. Thanks so much for watching.
When I think about the purpose of life, the following comes to mind from Jordan Peterson ― “The purpose of life, is to find a mode of being that’s so meaningful that the fact that life is suffering is no longer relevant.”
So many principles of Kant are essential to life. At 60, I’ve lost my way. By studying Kant we focus upon principles that lead us to happiness. Get busy living.
"At 60, I've lost my way". I hope for you that you are finding your way back to what you value in life. I'm a bit older than that, and in recent years I've taken the chance to mentally retrace my steps in order to consider and correct some of my shortcomings that ultimately have not helped or been productive to myself and my entourage. Albeit a stranger to you, I wish you all the best in finding the answers or peace of mind that you need.
“One of the great German philosophers, Immanuel Kant, even dropped the idea that you can see things as they are in themselves, because he had no way of knowing meditatively. He was a great mind - but the greater the mind, the greater the difficulty of seeing clearly. Your mind grabs every information that reaches to you, screens it, sorts out whatever is adjustable with your existing knowledge, allows it, and whatever is going to disturb your mind - anything new, unfamiliar, a stranger - it rejects. It is said of Immanuel Kant, one of the greatest systematizers, that one girl proposed to him. In the first place it is bad that the girl should propose, it is always the boy who proposes. But the girl must have waited and waited and Kant wouldn’t propose; the idea never occurred to him. He was so much rooted in his head, the heart was denied. So the girl, feeling too much time had been lost, proposed. Kant said, “I will think it over.” How can you think about love? Either it is there or not. It is not a question to be solved, it is a situation to respond to. Either your heart says yes or your heart says no and it is finished. What will you think? It is not a business proposal. But it was a business proposal to Kant. Too much head-orientation makes everything businesslike. So he thought, and he not only thought, he went to the library and concentrated on the books about love, marriage. Then he noted down in his notebook all that was in favor of marriage and all that was against. And he thought and thought and thought, and it is said that weighing the pros and cons, he decided in favor of marriage because a few points were more in favor than against. So it was a logical decision. Then he went and knocked at the girl’s door, and the father said, “She is already married and a mother of three children. So much time passed… you come a little late.” Time is needed for the mind. The mind is always late because time will be needed and the situation will be lost. And when you knock at the door, the girl has moved - she is already a mother of three children. And this is happening every moment. Remember, a situation is there, so act, don’t think, because if you think the situation will not wait for you. The girl will have moved. And when you are ready to respond there will be nothing to respond to. Kant was ready, but the mind takes time and situations are moving. Life is a flow, a flux, it is not static; otherwise the mind would have found the answer. If the girl had remained…. But the girl was getting old, she was missing life. She could not wait, she had to move, make a decision. Life is not static. If life were static there would be no need for meditation. The mind would do. Then you could think, and whenever, after many lives, you knocked at the door, the girl would be waiting for you. But life is a flux, a movement. Every moment it is changing and becoming new. If you miss a moment, you have missed."
Sorry to say pig eating is prohibited. It promotes SHAITANIC traits. CIGRETTE tobacco and heroine powder is strongly suspected of mixing SHAITANIC chemical at genetic level. Dr nisar. 10march2024
This is so brilliant, and I had forgotten how much Kant's philosophy has dictated how and why we conduct science in the way we do. I work in animal welfare science, and throughout this video I was reflecting on how myself, my colleagues and others relate to animals. It's interesting to see the differences between my "hard-data driven" co-workers compared to known animal rights advocates in science, who often manipulate data and information to drive an agenda. Both of them are passionate about animals, but the former aims to make a difference based on truth and reason, to help influence policy and practically improve the field of animal care and conservation; the latter aims to skew reason and targets people's emotions to compel them to act. Sadly at the moment it's this that is driving a lot of policy decisions, and often leads to the detriment of animal welfare 😐. The science is so important when it comes to understanding what is best practice for protecting animals. It doesn't excuse animal mistreatment, that's the whole point of having ethics committees in science today! I'm sure Kant would have a few things to say about it if he were still around.
Just took a peek at your channel and Instagram description, very cool and Kantian! I look forward to learning from your content when you start adding stuff.
You have an interesting approach in trying to learn more about philosophy through biology, I myself have always preferred physics but I imagine there is a lot one could learn by reflecting on biology.
It always bothers me when people decry western culture, or even claim that western culture is a fabrication and that the west merely appropriates other cultures when some philosophers like Kant, Plato, Nietzsche, and Locke had such massive impacts not only on the west but the whole world. Empirical analysis and other scientific fields are heavily influenced by philosophers like Kant
#6 - Never Lie. Can’t agree with Kant about never lying. If a criminal shows up at my door looking to kill my husband, I certainly don’t owe him the truth. Many people saved thousands of lives during WWII when they lied to the Nazis and hid Jews. They were considered heroes. I think when forced to choose between 2 evils, you choose the lesser of the two.
There is a subtle similarity between Kantian philosophy and Stoicism. Stoicism is just much easier to read and live by. Read Epictetus, Seneca or Marcus Aurelius...if you want to!
Even if you dont beleive in his divinity or miracles, there are still many similarities with Kants teachings and Jesus's. He taught about controlling your emotions but loving openly, treating people fairly, to be charitable without demanding things in return and to be moral without becoming egotistic. People tend to forget that the pharisees were the ones who believed that just living by the laws without doing good actions didnt make you a good person and he spent much of his life doing good actions, he helped the sick, the poor, and the dregs of society while shunning the rich people who simply avoided most sin while offering up sacrifices to pay their way into heaven. When the adulteress was to he stoned he didn't send thoughts and prayers, he stood up to the mob. Much of this aligns with Kants teachings, even his belief that morality came more from actions then just from your spirit or your faith.
I cannot agree with the 12 minute not lying rule. Jeez Anyone ever holding someone at the time of that person's death is in a position to doing the best you can there. I am not sure of never lying. Also, I have bought time and saved lives by lying. When killers came, "I told them to go the other way." Unlike the judgement that the wife should have told the truth when the killers came for the husband. No!
I am surprised and saddened that I am the first to point this out but the US Constitution does NOT say anything about a right to happiness. There is a line about life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. However, that is not in the US Constitution, it's in the US Declaration of Independence.
It's also interesting that 100 years earlier. John Locke wrote "property" as the third right. Happiness seems too abstract to me. It's like chasing a butterfly that's too beautiful to actually catch. The pursuit itself is where you find the joy.
thank you for giving me a name for how I've been striving to live for decades. currently, my act-from-duty has been to participate actively in the fight to save democracy in my country, israel.
Kant had thus formulated the main problem of constitutionalism, “The constitution of a state is eventually based on the morals of its citizens, which, in its turns, is based on the goodness of this constitution.” Kant's idea is the foundation for the the Constitution of the United States Kant was the authentic Libertarian The real definition of Libertarian - political philosophy, advocates a limited role for government in domestic and foreign affairs as well as a strong protection of civil liberties. Civil and political rights are a class of rights that protect individuals' freedom from infringement by governments, social organizations, and private individuals. They ensure one's entitlement to participate in the civil and political life of society and the state without discrimination or repression
In my perception, while I felt the 10 Life Lessons are constructive, the examples fell short (although they were expressed with kindness). But maybe I'm being overcritical in my expectations. Thank you for the effort put into this video, just the same. The message is useful and important for us human beings.
The singular truth is that Everyone is selfish and there is NO such thing as altruism. If I don't put myself first - who should occupy that position? A politician?? A doctor?? A pope?? A god??
WELL SAID! I will add: The desire to help others and act on that desire with your free will, is a selfish act, because you want to do it and therefore do it. That decision first makes feel good (before the beneficiary even knows of the act). Then, upon the giving, the benefactor feels a second round of joy from his selfish act and the beneficiary will hopefully feel and express gratitude. The former is guaranteed the later is not.
4:00 How can it not be okay to kill one innocent person to save many other innocents if that one person is unwilling to die for the others, but if they are willing it is okay. We hold a special place for people who sacrifice their own life to save others. We call them heroes and we give them awards like The Metal of Honor or the Victoria Cross.
Excellent video. And besides Philochrony is the theory that describes the nature of time and demonstrates its existence. Time is magnitive: objective, Imperceptible and measurable.
Think about the animals you eat, our decision to label them an edible commodity doesn't detract from their consciousness or right to live. They don't march freely to their death, they fight for their life, like you would in the face of an executioner.
Kant would argue animals are not ends in themselves, only humans are, because they are rational. The idea that they are is a contemporary extension of the Categoric Imperative
In listening to this I further confirm that "Philosophers" throughout the ages were skillful shufflers of the superficial by Kant dismissing the role of "Religion" as the base of "Morality", showing that it promote "Beliefs" that falls short of "KNOWLEDGE", one, "Trusting" that the figurehead founder of a Religion is a "GOD-MOUTHPIECE", a MANIFESTATION of the DIVNE Overwhelming a human, other that awaken one's INNER-BEING that facilitate the "Message" conveyed. For sure, ALL "Religions"-"Belief" systems have been manipulated with intent of distancing the minds from one's True Being that is in fact one's "MOTOR-FORCE" within each being known as SOUL, itself PURE, INCORRUPTIBLE, ALLKNOWING, ETERNAL with it's "SUBTLETIES" that the "Material" world's intricacies easily distracts one from, hence the usefulness of "Solitude" and "Harmony" with one's "INNERSELF". The Hindus have made a BUSINESS form as well as "The Church", oblivious about the nefarious force that is the ABSENSE of the DIVINE BEING of "The SOUL" is but a Mustardseed of it's source. The "IMPIRICIST" is about the only "INDEPENDENT" search that might be led to "REAL TRUTH" provided one is not persuaded by the "Evil Personified" that we live in the midst of, it's been editing and manipulating the written word for many millennials, so that for long "Academia" have been to spawn convincing eloquent sophisticated ignorants with lofty titles and designations. Such is the FRAGILITY OF MAN. This from a non-Academic unbiased "IMPIRICIST" that see BEYOND the pale. PEACE PROFOUND!!!
If your spouse commits murder or worse, what do we do? Lie for them? Hide them, knowing they could kill again? What if your beautiful wife accidentally kills someone while driving home after drinking with friends? Turn her in, knowing you'll put her in prison for ten years... Tough, moral decisions.
I think the example of the bartender doing her duty even in the face of personal tragedy conflicts with the 1st lesson to a degree. Sure, the customer doesn't know what's going on in the worker's life but the worker does know and, unless it is their own business, they can communicate that to their their boss. In that case, the boss should give the worker time off - paid, in a perfect world - to grief, or any other form of support, because the server's personhood is more important than their job. Otherwise, the boss would be treating the server only as means.
To have empathy for others is to be a caring individual that respects others rights. You don't have to say you're being a liberal no you're being A human that sees that humanity will not continue without respect. Awm
He didn't have some bad thinking, but I only really came here to hear if my name came up and if it was pronounced correctly. One of my relatives was a friend of Kant, although being German, he probably had a different pronunciation. I think the family split between England and Germany before Kant, so he's probably a great grand cousin or some such. I don't think I'm a descendant, but I do like to think that he helped Kant develop some of this philosophy. It lines up quite nicely with my own, so maybe the disposition is in my DNA, or maybe it was taught, I really have no way to know
In a number of essays on race and in various Lectures on Anthropology, Kant suggests that the human races differ with regard to their natural incentives and talents. They thus have different capacities to acquire culture and varying tendencies to perfect themselves. Kant here holds that only the white race "contains all incentives and talents in itself"; the American indigenous people, by contrast, are said to be indifferent and lazy and to acquire no culture; the "Negro race . . . acquire[s] culture, but only a culture of slaves; that is, they allow themselves to be trained"; the "Hindus" finally "acquire culture in the highest degree, but only in the arts and not in the sciences. They never raise it up to abstract concepts" (AA 25:1187). Against the background of such a racial hierarchy, Kant seems to attribute to the white race a privileged role in actualizing humanity's full potential. Non-white races, conversely, seem predisposed, on his account, to assume subservient and dependent roles.
Some very good points from Kant. However, I do not agree with the truth vs the lie. I think it leads down a slippery slope. Perhaps in Katian Ethics, you can't be held responsible for telling the truth, but since going through a recent lawsuit myself, I'd beg to differ.
. Great video, thanks for posting. Did Kant come up with the ridiculous thought experiment which states that one should tell the truth in situations where a lie might save a life? Or is it we modern and brilliant philosophers who have extrapolated that as a logical outcome of adhering to that rule?
Salute ,Sir for imparting these precious knowledge on the philosophy of life which is in harmony with the LAW OF NATURE, REASON, LOGIC AND SCIENCE. THE ONLY THING WHICH IS THE ENEMY OF REASON AND LOGIC IS RELIGION. A WORD TO THE WISE. Thks.
The woke activism plug at 5:26 really detracts from the content quality... Equal rights and freedom is relevant to every human being - not just women, "LGBTQ+" and "minorities".
You don't understand what woke is. Woke people think that white males are holding them down. They see themselves as victims and want to punish white people and men for this. They want to turn the hierarchy upside down so that the more levels of minority status can be claimed by a person, the more such a person has a right to special treatment. They are opposed to equality but rather are racist and sexist. This video is stating that all people deserve equal treatment and the right to individual freedoms. It is not throwing anyone under the bus the way the woke crowd does.
20:40 Kant sounds like someone with Aspergers. His obsession with schedules, measurable effects, order, and with objective morality are all common traits with people who have aspergers.
I would argue that it is not enough, at all, and in fact will probably lead you astray. Lao-Tsu and Chuangzi were much closer to the truth than Confucius.
11:30 I don't agree with this. While it is true that in most cases lying is morally wrong, there are times when telling a lie is the best option. If for example you are living in Germany in 1942. You are doing your best to be a good, moral person and follow the law. You discover that your neighbor is hiding a family of Jews on his property. Then one day the police stop by and ask if you know of any Jews being hidden in the area. According to Kant lying to the police is morally wrong, you would be annualizing your dignity, even though telling the truth would lead to the death of not only the Jewish family, but your neighbor as well. Or, if your wife asks you if she is getting to fat. You know your wife is doing her best to stay healthy and thin, but as a person ages staying thin gets harder, and she has recently been gaining weight. Telling her that she is getting fat would hurt her feelings and it would not really help her. So you tell her she is doing fine. But children are much more honest. ua-cam.com/users/shortscjuvjvR3gbo
If you listen this last slide number 10, ignoring the source I.e. Kant or any legend then you would be tempted to deduce that this is a discription much similar to a person with OCD. I wish to refer to the idea of inflexibility. Kant may not be rigid or dominating in his thoughts . I amy be mistaken under the influence of this commentary. Philosophy is meant for evolution of self and others. Dogmatic concepts or guiding principles could be perceived as inflexibly overpowering . Therefore such concepts may not liberate the individual but likely bind individual to guiding lamppost. Binding lamppost is not identical to philosophy. 🙏
I have never read anything about kant and thus won't form a definitive statement of what I think about his philosofy but it seems that his philosophy almost contradicts itself at some points or at least become very vague on its implementation of it. On the one hand he says humans are prone to corruption to which i fully agree, but then on the other hand he gives them this 'absolute' ideology. It's just like what happened with christianity and the inquisition in my eyes, people become blinded by their 'divine virtues' and justify their actions with it. Which brings me to my second point: he says his philosophy doesn't rely on divine virtues but on reasoning, but then he proceeds to basically say that if you see someone be oppressed, you SHOULD fight against the oppressor. (which in my eyes is quite the 'divine' statement)To which I respond: who is the judge? Are you yourself the judge? We've seen what happens then... Other point is that he seems to cast emotions aside as if emotions are 'bad' or not useful. While his whole argument of 'respect for other people' seems to be based entirely on a pov of compassion. Also saying stuff like dont make decisions on emotions as they will often lead to regret. Which again is such an 'absolute' statement as if there is no value in emotions. Then there's also nothing logical about treating other humans with respect. Logic doesn't define whats right or wrong. Or at least in my ideo of logic it doesn't. Maybe he means something else when he says reasoning. He also makes reasoning this ultimate path, or at least he makes it seem like it in this video and like how are you going to deal with people who just don't care or dont agree? How are you gonna win them over? Their reasoning would be like: ok i dont care about you, you dont have to care about me,... Their reasoning isnt going to lead to the same 'moral virtues' if they didnt already accept your underlying 'objective truths'. And then my biggest point is that of basically saying at the end: my philosofy overlooks your 'religion'. Which i think is quite arrogant, although i'm sure he's not an arrogant person based on his idea of the importance of loving other people. It's also kinda saying religion is 'wrong' in a sense, that you would be stupid to let 'religion' impede your 'oh so mighty logical reasoning' Again this is my opinion on him after 20 min of probably the worst video to watch if you wanna get to know his views. I really liked the video btw, just not as an educational one about his philosofy. I remain neutral on him for now, please tear my arguments apart if you can so that I can try to understand him more. There's many more problems that i thought of but they all kinda boil down to: its not exactly clear how he sees this actually implemented and its not clear how some of his points work together BTW his claim of: my philosofy is based on reasoning, not on objective truths, really brought up questionmarks in my head because it sure does seem in this video he bases his philosofy on objective truths like: reasoning is this holy tool, treat others with respect etc,... so I'm expecting very much that i'm just missing a LOT of information to make it all make sense. I dont believe he would be that ignorant or hypocritical. Oh and I forgot to bring up his point about you contributing to a murder if you lie to save his life
@@yamagvchi I'd recommend Nietzsche (beyond good and evil) because he really touches on a fundamental problem, although i consider him a quite radical thinker. (I believe in individuality and dualism etc) I also recommend reading about Jung. (you can read the red book but its not easy to really comprehend and break down, at least for me) Although he might not be a philosopher, for me he kinda explored the idea of nierzsche further from a slightly different and less nihilistic angle. I also really like Slavoj Zizek, he's really hard to comprehend for me but I see him as someone who keeps everyone in check today. Being critical of a lot of different ideas especially capitalism. He also seems very nihilistic but I like how he can show the flaws of my beliefs about the world even tho i dont agree with him. Then you also have Viktor Frankl - mans search for meaning Theres also the art of war by sun tzu and lao te ching by lao tzu (taoism) which were the first ones i heard about. Lastly I think maybe the greek guys: aurelius, plato, aristotle I myself am thinking about reading george orwell and bertrand russel next. I think they might be ⁶ most applicable today.
Or MEN!! Men has struggles and are treated unfairly in many ways too, and it harms women and others too. It's getting a little bit old to hear that constant "everybody suffers except men" reasoning, it's not constructive. And no, this is not to deny womens (or any other minoritys) struggles, rights or the battle for them. Rather the complete opposite. People just doesn't seem to understand that it's all connected and dependent on each other.
Perhaps more effective sticking to what he actually wrote instead of imposing what you think he may or may not argue to fit your environmental leanings (however accurate or moral it is)
The wife example in number 6 presents a false dichotomy. Either she can tell the truth, or tell a lie, but there is a third option, which is that she can tell nothing. The video implies it would be more moral to tell a potential killer "he's upstairs getting a shower, won't even hear you coming" than to say "why would I tell you that?" Fine, lying could still be considered immoral in this circumstance, but so too can telling the truth, at least too plainly. Telling the truth in a roundabout way would be moral, "he's not skydiving" for example. In Kants own words, the killer is already an immoral actor, and to quite a high degree, so why would assisting an immoral act with the truth be considered moral. Moral would be to deter, delay, or detain the assailant in some way without resorting to deception
![Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals [SUMMARY] by Immanuel Kant](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Czk_co-2m4I/mqdefault.jpg)
Immanuel Kant says “One who makes himself a worm cannot complain afterwards if people step on him”
We hope that you enjoyed this video and for more videos to help you find success and happiness using ancient philosophical wisdom, don’t forget to subscribe. Thanks so much for watching.
ς
ς
ς
👻[hÜg]💗
i hope you really dont believe this man to me hes the bane of my existence.
“Lessons in life will be repeated until they are learned.” 🙏🏽
It's like incarnation
Amen. 🙏🏻
@@hoho6708 Re Incarnation.....
Carnation is birth
my second grade teacher is the one i hate the most she was influenced by kant.
Love number 1. Treat all humans with respect. We’re all just trying to achieve our fullest perfection through our own freedom.
No, we as a group are a delusional flock of sheep beings
You have a cool channel too. Respect to you 🙂
Except every politician in the world. Politicians crave POWER over others. Pelosi is the perfect example of that.
I, as an European white man, and a Christian, do not feel respected by anyone on society.
People do not follow that rule :(
@@campelodemagalhaes
You want to play the victim don't you?
When I think about the purpose of life, the following comes to mind from Jordan Peterson ― “The purpose of life, is to find a mode of being that’s so meaningful that the fact that life is suffering is no longer relevant.”
I agree with you 'who finds his why can bear almost any how' Nietzsche
He couldn’t do it himself, he suffers from extreme addiction and depression
eeeee - no. suffering is a perennial requisite to the instantiation of meaning
@@plato2030 Yes, he does. And despite that, he finds his meaning. That's the point. And you can't see it because of your dislike for him. Pity.
@@plato2030 those are his sufferings.. you're not proving your point.
replying to you is futile yet here i am
So many principles of Kant are essential to life. At 60, I’ve lost my way. By studying Kant we focus upon principles that lead us to happiness. Get busy living.
Your story sounds like it would be a good lesson to teach others from your life wisdom.
Bravo, Mrs./Mr., truly! As long there’s life and will keep on improving yourself through acquiring the best out of knowledge and wisdom.
i hate deontologists more than nazis hate jews. also if becoming a slave gives me more power in a sense then of course i would do it.
And I’ve already learned because I’m also now looking at how I can apply this to my life and not how other people should apply it.
"At 60, I've lost my way". I hope for you that you are finding your way back to what you value in life. I'm a bit older than that, and in recent years I've taken the chance to mentally retrace my steps in order to consider and correct some of my shortcomings that ultimately have not helped or been productive to myself and my entourage. Albeit a stranger to you, I wish you all the best in finding the answers or peace of mind that you need.
“One of the great German philosophers, Immanuel Kant, even dropped the idea that you can see things as they are in themselves, because he had no way of knowing meditatively. He was a great mind - but the greater the mind, the greater the difficulty of seeing clearly. Your mind grabs every information that reaches to you, screens it, sorts out whatever is adjustable with your existing knowledge, allows it, and whatever is going to disturb your mind - anything new, unfamiliar, a stranger - it rejects.
It is said of Immanuel Kant, one of the greatest systematizers, that one girl proposed to him. In the first place it is bad that the girl should propose, it is always the boy who proposes. But the girl must have waited and waited and Kant wouldn’t propose; the idea never occurred to him. He was so much rooted in his head, the heart was denied. So the girl, feeling too much time had been lost, proposed.
Kant said, “I will think it over.” How can you think about love? Either it is there or not. It is not a question to be solved, it is a situation to respond to. Either your heart says yes or your heart says no and it is finished. What will you think? It is not a business proposal. But it was a business proposal to Kant. Too much head-orientation makes everything businesslike. So he thought, and he not only thought, he went to the library and concentrated on the books about love, marriage. Then he noted down in his notebook all that was in favor of marriage and all that was against. And he thought and thought and thought, and it is said that weighing the pros and cons, he decided in favor of marriage because a few points were more in favor than against. So it was a logical decision.
Then he went and knocked at the girl’s door, and the father said, “She is already married and a mother of three children. So much time passed… you come a little late.”
Time is needed for the mind. The mind is always late because time will be needed and the situation will be lost. And when you knock at the door, the girl has moved - she is already a mother of three children. And this is happening every moment. Remember, a situation is there, so act, don’t think, because if you think the situation will not wait for you. The girl will have moved. And when you are ready to respond there will be nothing to respond to. Kant was ready, but the mind takes time and situations are moving. Life is a flow, a flux, it is not static; otherwise the mind would have found the answer. If the girl had remained…. But the girl was getting old, she was missing life. She could not wait, she had to move, make a decision.
Life is not static. If life were static there would be no need for meditation. The mind would do. Then you could think, and whenever, after many lives, you knocked at the door, the girl would be waiting for you. But life is a flux, a movement. Every moment it is changing and becoming new. If you miss a moment, you have missed."
Sorry to say pig eating is prohibited. It promotes SHAITANIC traits.
CIGRETTE tobacco and heroine powder is strongly suspected of mixing SHAITANIC chemical at genetic level.
Dr nisar.
10march2024
This is so brilliant, and I had forgotten how much Kant's philosophy has dictated how and why we conduct science in the way we do. I work in animal welfare science, and throughout this video I was reflecting on how myself, my colleagues and others relate to animals.
It's interesting to see the differences between my "hard-data driven" co-workers compared to known animal rights advocates in science, who often manipulate data and information to drive an agenda. Both of them are passionate about animals, but the former aims to make a difference based on truth and reason, to help influence policy and practically improve the field of animal care and conservation; the latter aims to skew reason and targets people's emotions to compel them to act. Sadly at the moment it's this that is driving a lot of policy decisions, and often leads to the detriment of animal welfare 😐.
The science is so important when it comes to understanding what is best practice for protecting animals. It doesn't excuse animal mistreatment, that's the whole point of having ethics committees in science today!
I'm sure Kant would have a few things to say about it if he were still around.
Just took a peek at your channel and Instagram description, very cool and Kantian! I look forward to learning from your content when you start adding stuff.
You have an interesting approach in trying to learn more about philosophy through biology, I myself have always preferred physics but I imagine there is a lot one could learn by reflecting on biology.
no more animal rights thats bullshit.
It always bothers me when people decry western culture, or even claim that western culture is a fabrication and that the west merely appropriates other cultures when some philosophers like Kant, Plato, Nietzsche, and Locke had such massive impacts not only on the west but the whole world. Empirical analysis and other scientific fields are heavily influenced by philosophers like Kant
#6 - Never Lie. Can’t agree with Kant about never lying. If a criminal shows up at my door looking to kill my husband, I certainly don’t owe him the truth. Many people saved thousands of lives during WWII when they lied to the Nazis and hid Jews. They were considered heroes. I think when forced to choose between 2 evils, you choose the lesser of the two.
Agree he was crazy on this point
Freedom comes with responsibilities. No freedom is absolute. Freedom must have boundaries to make it meaningful.
There is a subtle similarity between Kantian philosophy and Stoicism. Stoicism is just much easier to read and live by. Read Epictetus, Seneca or Marcus Aurelius...if you want to!
deontologists and stoics need to burn in hell. i hate deontologists more than nazis hate jews. to me stoics would be communists to nazis.
Even if you dont beleive in his divinity or miracles, there are still many similarities with Kants teachings and Jesus's. He taught about controlling your emotions but loving openly, treating people fairly, to be charitable without demanding things in return and to be moral without becoming egotistic. People tend to forget that the pharisees were the ones who believed that just living by the laws without doing good actions didnt make you a good person and he spent much of his life doing good actions, he helped the sick, the poor, and the dregs of society while shunning the rich people who simply avoided most sin while offering up sacrifices to pay their way into heaven. When the adulteress was to he stoned he didn't send thoughts and prayers, he stood up to the mob. Much of this aligns with Kants teachings, even his belief that morality came more from actions then just from your spirit or your faith.
Thank you so much for this channel. You should consider making a paid course that goes into extreme depth. I would gladly pay.
By the way, keep teaching. Do not EVER stop! We can win this!
Amazing teachings and rally fantastic words of my favorite philosopher Kant
I cannot agree with the 12 minute not lying rule.
Jeez
Anyone ever holding someone at the time of that person's death is in a position to doing the best you can there.
I am not sure of never lying.
Also, I have bought time and saved lives by lying.
When killers came, "I told them to go the other way." Unlike the judgement that the wife should have told the truth when the killers came for the husband. No!
I am surprised and saddened that I am the first to point this out but the US Constitution does NOT say anything about a right to happiness. There is a line about life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. However, that is not in the US Constitution, it's in the US Declaration of Independence.
Thank you, was looking in the comments for someone to have said this before I posted it!
It's also interesting that 100 years earlier. John Locke wrote "property" as the third right. Happiness seems too abstract to me. It's like chasing a butterfly that's too beautiful to actually catch. The pursuit itself is where you find the joy.
thank you for giving me a name for how I've been striving to live for decades.
currently, my act-from-duty has been to participate actively in the fight to save democracy in my country, israel.
I agree about everything except where truth must remain constant.
Kant had thus formulated the main problem of constitutionalism, “The constitution of a state is eventually based on the morals of its citizens, which, in its turns, is based on the goodness of this constitution.” Kant's idea is the foundation for the the Constitution of the United States
Kant was the authentic Libertarian
The real definition of Libertarian - political philosophy, advocates a limited role for government in domestic and foreign affairs as well as a strong protection of civil liberties. Civil and political rights are a class of rights that protect individuals' freedom from infringement by governments, social organizations, and private individuals. They ensure one's entitlement to participate in the civil and political life of society and the state without discrimination or repression
In my perception, while I felt the 10 Life Lessons are constructive, the examples fell short (although they were expressed with kindness). But maybe I'm being overcritical in my expectations. Thank you for the effort put into this video, just the same. The message is useful and important for us human beings.
The singular truth is that Everyone is selfish and there is NO such thing as altruism. If I don't put myself first - who should occupy that position? A politician?? A doctor?? A pope?? A god??
WELL SAID! I will add: The desire to help others and act on that desire with your free will, is a selfish act, because you want to do it and therefore do it. That decision first makes feel good (before the beneficiary even knows of the act). Then, upon the giving, the benefactor feels a second round of joy from his selfish act and the beneficiary will hopefully feel and express gratitude. The former is guaranteed the later is not.
Thank you,philosophies for life
lesson 1 very relevant during this pandemic
4:00 How can it not be okay to kill one innocent person to save many other innocents if that one person is unwilling to die for the others, but if they are willing it is okay.
We hold a special place for people who sacrifice their own life to save others. We call them heroes and we give them awards like The Metal of Honor or the Victoria Cross.
apsolutely beautiful person citizen Kant, all respect , he is worthy of it
Great commentary on Kant’s Philosophy!!
Excellent video. And besides Philochrony is the theory that describes the nature of time and demonstrates its existence. Time is magnitive: objective, Imperceptible and measurable.
Open your eyes to see, Open you mind to be seen. MY OWN THOUGHT.
this is why i hate western society at least westerners who study philosophy.
Think about the animals you eat, our decision to label them an edible commodity doesn't detract from their consciousness or right to live. They don't march freely to their death, they fight for their life, like you would in the face of an executioner.
Kant would argue animals are not ends in themselves, only humans are, because they are rational. The idea that they are is a contemporary extension of the Categoric Imperative
Amazing channel 💛
Great lessons of Kant.
This video needs 7.7B views, not 96K views :(
In listening to this I further confirm that "Philosophers" throughout the ages were skillful shufflers of the superficial by Kant dismissing the role of "Religion" as the base of "Morality", showing that it promote "Beliefs" that falls short of "KNOWLEDGE", one, "Trusting" that the figurehead founder of a Religion is a "GOD-MOUTHPIECE", a MANIFESTATION of the DIVNE Overwhelming a human, other that awaken one's INNER-BEING that facilitate the "Message" conveyed. For sure, ALL "Religions"-"Belief" systems have been manipulated with intent of distancing the minds from one's True Being that is in fact one's "MOTOR-FORCE" within each being known as SOUL, itself PURE, INCORRUPTIBLE, ALLKNOWING, ETERNAL with it's "SUBTLETIES" that the "Material" world's intricacies easily distracts one from, hence the usefulness of "Solitude" and "Harmony" with one's "INNERSELF". The Hindus have made a BUSINESS form as well as "The Church", oblivious about the nefarious force that is the ABSENSE of the DIVINE BEING of "The SOUL" is but a Mustardseed of it's source. The "IMPIRICIST" is about the only "INDEPENDENT" search that might be led to "REAL TRUTH" provided one is not persuaded by the "Evil Personified" that we live in the midst of, it's been editing and manipulating the written word for many millennials, so that for long "Academia" have been to spawn convincing eloquent sophisticated ignorants with lofty titles and designations. Such is the FRAGILITY OF MAN.
This from a non-Academic unbiased "IMPIRICIST" that see BEYOND the pale. PEACE PROFOUND!!!
A tremendously excellent video.
Great job. Keep them coming!
if you tell the truth which knowingly leads to the death of your spouse, you are not responsible? Lost me at this point.
If your spouse commits murder or worse, what do we do? Lie for them? Hide them, knowing they could kill again?
What if your beautiful wife accidentally kills someone while driving home after drinking with friends? Turn her in, knowing you'll put her in prison for ten years...
Tough, moral decisions.
Thank a lot!
really great expectations within his infinite cubicules for a man that never went outside his home town 😁
Interesting vid! Thanks for delivering it :)
Great video. Thanks
Great Content, Amazing Voice and Delivery. Subscribed.
I think the example of the bartender doing her duty even in the face of personal tragedy conflicts with the 1st lesson to a degree. Sure, the customer doesn't know what's going on in the worker's life but the worker does know and, unless it is their own business, they can communicate that to their their boss. In that case, the boss should give the worker time off - paid, in a perfect world - to grief, or any other form of support, because the server's personhood is more important than their job. Otherwise, the boss would be treating the server only as means.
Awesome..teachings..!
This is a wake up call!
So
Thank you sir
thanks a lot!
Thank you
To have empathy for others is to be a caring individual that respects others rights. You don't have to say you're being a liberal no you're being A human that sees that humanity will not continue without respect. Awm
But I Kant.
Haha good one
great work man i'm happy i subbed to you
He didn't have some bad thinking, but I only really came here to hear if my name came up and if it was pronounced correctly. One of my relatives was a friend of Kant, although being German, he probably had a different pronunciation.
I think the family split between England and Germany before Kant, so he's probably a great grand cousin or some such. I don't think I'm a descendant, but I do like to think that he helped Kant develop some of this philosophy.
It lines up quite nicely with my own, so maybe the disposition is in my DNA, or maybe it was taught, I really have no way to know
Most of Kant's philosophy should br considered partially when it comes to practicality
Thanks alot
Humanity treats to others.
Do a program on Rand v. Kant. THAT would be educational and interesting.
When read it once you see it it repeated or new things added in your better life existed for your life is good nature existed .
Immanuel Kant and Krishan Kant have same surnames spelt. Germanic people were originally Punjabis before 1 AD.
Thanks
love the end: be efficient in life.
i hate deontologists more than nazis hate jews.
@@jarrodyuki7081 I have just heard that term btw.
In a number of essays on race and in various Lectures on Anthropology, Kant suggests that the human races differ with regard to their natural incentives and talents. They thus have different capacities to acquire culture and varying tendencies to perfect themselves. Kant here holds that only the white race "contains all incentives and talents in itself"; the American indigenous people, by contrast, are said to be indifferent and lazy and to acquire no culture; the "Negro race . . . acquire[s] culture, but only a culture of slaves; that is, they allow themselves to be trained"; the "Hindus" finally "acquire culture in the highest degree, but only in the arts and not in the sciences. They never raise it up to abstract concepts" (AA 25:1187). Against the background of such a racial hierarchy, Kant seems to attribute to the white race a privileged role in actualizing humanity's full potential. Non-white races, conversely, seem predisposed, on his account, to assume subservient and dependent roles.
You are legend !!
dont listen to him naka.
Some very good points from Kant. However, I do not agree with the truth vs the lie. I think it leads down a slippery slope. Perhaps in Katian Ethics, you can't be held responsible for telling the truth, but since going through a recent lawsuit myself, I'd beg to differ.
If someone asks me where my wife is because they want to kill her I'll kill them 1st, fuck the ethics.
Basically he said Be true to yourself and your feelings.
What a kind man
Great video
. Great video, thanks for posting. Did Kant come up with the ridiculous thought experiment which states that one should tell the truth in situations where a lie might save a life? Or is it we modern and brilliant philosophers who have extrapolated that as a logical outcome of adhering to that rule?
Still six years working with my all experience .
Great philosopher
🙏
it is my divine right to erase other peoples memories of me and separate my fate from humanity and accountability.
#2 True freedom is, equality.
True freedom is being disciplined
@@theoyancey 😂
💛🌸
Salute ,Sir for imparting these precious knowledge on the philosophy of life which is in harmony with the LAW OF NATURE, REASON, LOGIC AND SCIENCE. THE ONLY THING WHICH IS THE ENEMY OF REASON AND LOGIC IS RELIGION. A WORD TO THE WISE. Thks.
18:40 logic>emotions
The woke activism plug at 5:26 really detracts from the content quality... Equal rights and freedom is relevant to every human being - not just women, "LGBTQ+" and "minorities".
You don't understand what woke is. Woke people think that white males are holding them down. They see themselves as victims and want to punish white people and men for this. They want to turn the hierarchy upside down so that the more levels of minority status can be claimed by a person, the more such a person has a right to special treatment. They are opposed to equality but rather are racist and sexist. This video is stating that all people deserve equal treatment and the right to individual freedoms. It is not throwing anyone under the bus the way the woke crowd does.
We have to journey ourselves First between our journey and Kant's Philosophy: adopting concepts versus adapting them!
This comment needs a heart.
Dig It.💖💝🙏
Stop voting for big government if you believe in individual freedoms. Vote for those who promote small government.
@Solve Everything So who should have authority over you then?
Love the points made... Still going to eat bunnies. If I want to see a Tiger or Lions get eaten, I just go to a Detroit Sports Event, 🤣
💀💀💀💀😂😂😂😂😂😂
Chidi, from The Good Place brought me here
Although what you (Kant) said has much value I can't help but see that there is some naiveté in it.
There are many cases in which stealing is good praxis and morally correct
How to be a kant , I like it
You can think like him by thinking the Thing in itself.But if you want to achieve similar achievement to him,you have to be a genius,a real genius.
20:40 Kant sounds like someone with Aspergers. His obsession with schedules, measurable effects, order, and with objective morality are all common traits with people who have aspergers.
I recommend you that you can read the books from han Fei zhi or han yu
It is enough for you in your life.
I would argue that it is not enough, at all, and in fact will probably lead you astray. Lao-Tsu and Chuangzi were much closer to the truth than Confucius.
11:30 I don't agree with this. While it is true that in most cases lying is morally wrong, there are times when telling a lie is the best option.
If for example you are living in Germany in 1942. You are doing your best to be a good, moral person and follow the law. You discover that your neighbor is hiding a family of Jews on his property.
Then one day the police stop by and ask if you know of any Jews being hidden in the area.
According to Kant lying to the police is morally wrong, you would be annualizing your dignity, even though telling the truth would lead to the death of not only the Jewish family, but your neighbor as well.
Or, if your wife asks you if she is getting to fat. You know your wife is doing her best to stay healthy and thin, but as a person ages staying thin gets harder, and she has recently been gaining weight. Telling her that she is getting fat would hurt her feelings and it would not really help her. So you tell her she is doing fine.
But children are much more honest.
ua-cam.com/users/shortscjuvjvR3gbo
If you listen this last slide number 10, ignoring the source I.e. Kant or any legend then you would be tempted to deduce that this is a discription much similar to a person with OCD.
I wish to refer to the idea of inflexibility.
Kant may not be rigid or dominating in his thoughts . I amy be mistaken under the influence of this commentary.
Philosophy is meant for evolution of self and others. Dogmatic concepts or guiding principles could be perceived as inflexibly overpowering . Therefore such concepts may not liberate the individual but likely bind individual to guiding lamppost.
Binding lamppost is not identical to philosophy.
🙏
I was hooked untill you brought up respecting women and LGBTQ 🤦✋
I have never read anything about kant and thus won't form a definitive statement of what I think about his philosofy but it seems that his philosophy almost contradicts itself at some points or at least become very vague on its implementation of it.
On the one hand he says humans are prone to corruption to which i fully agree, but then on the other hand he gives them this 'absolute' ideology. It's just like what happened with christianity and the inquisition in my eyes, people become blinded by their 'divine virtues' and justify their actions with it.
Which brings me to my second point: he says his philosophy doesn't rely on divine virtues but on reasoning, but then he proceeds to basically say that if you see someone be oppressed, you SHOULD fight against the oppressor. (which in my eyes is quite the 'divine' statement)To which I respond: who is the judge? Are you yourself the judge? We've seen what happens then...
Other point is that he seems to cast emotions aside as if emotions are 'bad' or not useful. While his whole argument of 'respect for other people' seems to be based entirely on a pov of compassion. Also saying stuff like dont make decisions on emotions as they will often lead to regret. Which again is such an 'absolute' statement as if there is no value in emotions. Then there's also nothing logical about treating other humans with respect. Logic doesn't define whats right or wrong. Or at least in my ideo of logic it doesn't. Maybe he means something else when he says reasoning.
He also makes reasoning this ultimate path, or at least he makes it seem like it in this video and like how are you going to deal with people who just don't care or dont agree? How are you gonna win them over? Their reasoning would be like: ok i dont care about you, you dont have to care about me,... Their reasoning isnt going to lead to the same 'moral virtues' if they didnt already accept your underlying 'objective truths'.
And then my biggest point is that of basically saying at the end: my philosofy overlooks your 'religion'. Which i think is quite arrogant, although i'm sure he's not an arrogant person based on his idea of the importance of loving other people.
It's also kinda saying religion is 'wrong' in a sense, that you would be stupid to let 'religion' impede your 'oh so mighty logical reasoning'
Again this is my opinion on him after 20 min of probably the worst video to watch if you wanna get to know his views.
I really liked the video btw, just not as an educational one about his philosofy.
I remain neutral on him for now, please tear my arguments apart if you can so that I can try to understand him more.
There's many more problems that i thought of but they all kinda boil down to: its not exactly clear how he sees this actually implemented and its not clear how some of his points work together
BTW his claim of: my philosofy is based on reasoning, not on objective truths, really brought up questionmarks in my head because it sure does seem in this video he bases his philosofy on objective truths like: reasoning is this holy tool, treat others with respect etc,... so I'm expecting very much that i'm just missing a LOT of information to make it all make sense. I dont believe he would be that ignorant or hypocritical. Oh and I forgot to bring up his point about you contributing to a murder if you lie to save his life
Do you have philosophers on your mind worth looking into? I’m just watching these as a pastime during work and Kant seems very limited or idealistic
@@yamagvchi
I'd recommend Nietzsche (beyond good and evil) because he really touches on a fundamental problem, although i consider him a quite radical thinker. (I believe in individuality and dualism etc)
I also recommend reading about Jung. (you can read the red book but its not easy to really comprehend and break down, at least for me) Although he might not be a philosopher, for me he kinda explored the idea of nierzsche further from a slightly different and less nihilistic angle.
I also really like Slavoj Zizek, he's really hard to comprehend for me but I see him as someone who keeps everyone in check today. Being critical of a lot of different ideas especially capitalism. He also seems very nihilistic but I like how he can show the flaws of my beliefs about the world even tho i dont agree with him.
Then you also have Viktor Frankl - mans search for meaning
Theres also the art of war by sun tzu and lao te ching by lao tzu (taoism) which were the first ones i heard about.
Lastly I think maybe the greek guys: aurelius, plato, aristotle
I myself am thinking about reading george orwell and bertrand russel next. I think they might be ⁶ most applicable today.
What's immoral are people who are selfish about there plight.
It's alright to lie to people who wants to harm other people. It's alright to lie to a murderer.
Kant disagrees
@@artodelprado go to hell!!!!
No where to see they are not work out so far .when they give my gift ?
Or MEN!! Men has struggles and are treated unfairly in many ways too, and it harms women and others too. It's getting a little bit old to hear that constant "everybody suffers except men" reasoning, it's not constructive. And no, this is not to deny womens (or any other minoritys) struggles, rights or the battle for them. Rather the complete opposite. People just doesn't seem to understand that it's all connected and dependent on each other.
Perhaps more effective sticking to what he actually wrote instead of imposing what you think he may or may not argue to fit your environmental leanings (however accurate or moral it is)
I just Kant
The wife example in number 6 presents a false dichotomy.
Either she can tell the truth, or tell a lie, but there is a third option, which is that she can tell nothing.
The video implies it would be more moral to tell a potential killer "he's upstairs getting a shower, won't even hear you coming" than to say "why would I tell you that?"
Fine, lying could still be considered immoral in this circumstance, but so too can telling the truth, at least too plainly. Telling the truth in a roundabout way would be moral, "he's not skydiving" for example.
In Kants own words, the killer is already an immoral actor, and to quite a high degree, so why would assisting an immoral act with the truth be considered moral. Moral would be to deter, delay, or detain the assailant in some way without resorting to deception
Amazing video!
OK, but nothing about the "Critiques", his major works here!
Never heard of him but interesting
Unitarians tal about Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part..
Mammals and every other animal. Plants too