My dear professor, exasperated by the continuing oversight of my fellow (yes, I was a real nerd, even the math teacher listened without saying a word!) used to say:
" do not have to listen to me because I punish you, but because you are convinced that it is the right thing to do! . Result? One can imagine ^ _ ^. I do not know how Mancini has endured a whole year to my class.
The reference to Kant's moral law is explicit in the words of Professor, as well as criticism of any kind of moral philosopher heteronomous, that is externally imposed and intended to achieve an end. The laws of the state fall into this second category. Are imposed by an entity external to man and provide for specific rights, duties and responsibilities, mandatory, otherwise the various sanctions and penalties (in extreme cases).
the mentality of today tend to emphasize now to one now to another form of regulation, without pausing to reflect that they are not mutually exclusive but complement each other. Just as the modernist and the conservative position are both ends up wrong. I will try, in my small way, to show that a synthesis is possible.
Starting from Kant's moral law (known in short, every book that then change the words!):
"Always act in such a way that the maxim of thy will may become the law of universal value"
It is clear from way, which indicated that the law has a value FORMAL. It guides you in the law. And as the law encourages the exercise of willpower on the impulse of feeling. You have to because, regardless of what you want. Count the principle upstream of the will, the intention with which it operates. This principle is found precisely in the form of the moral law. So that the good is given by following the moral law.
Against any wrong interpretation, Kant is specific to each individual to translate into reality the moral law, depending on the conditions under which it is located. These conditions involve the interaction of some single individual with more people, in a network of various social relations. And here comes the fun part. How do I to enforce for all people the moral law? Because it is rational and objective, it must be true beyond human needs. In theory. But in practice can be realized?
Because the moral law is independent of individual experience, needs to force a sponsor who can ensure the implementation without contradicting it. This guarantor is the state conceived by Kant. In fact, the philosopher does not deny at all, as a good rationalist, the laws of the State and its function. He knows very well that the man has strong selfish impulses and therefore needs to be regulated by law.
State for him to be based on three principles:
- Freedom
- Equality in front of the law
- Independence man that free
Only such a state can drive according to the moral law and its own laws, which in fact derived from the first, society.
Now, the company is something natural and necessary in human history and must not allow neither individualism nor other types of queens despotic. Although cosmopolitan, Kant recognizes the importance of society as a place where men relate to each other evolve. But this development is only possible if every man, even if they conflict with each other, shall be guided by laws. This significant statement, for which men are like trees:
" are forced to find another one above the other and of themselves, because they grow beautiful and straight, while others, who, in freedom and isolated each other, bring arms to taste grow up crippled, crooked and winding. "
This tells us that yes we have freedom over our bodies and our minds, but we're not really men if we fail to relate to each other. The ethical dimension of man, I repeat what I said in the preceding, it begins when he enters the other. The other is a mirror, a promotion, the spark that ignite the flame.
However, it remains the problem of emotional sphere. Kant relegated to the noumenal and puts it in the shade than the right, and I think this is a serious error, which affected the validity of his theories in later philosophical systems. The sentiment is an impulse and that is what drives us to know, to love and open ourselves to life. A life force, the main engine of man. But the sentiment can, and should be aided by reason. Especially in the social and relational. Before you say I'm free to do what I feel, nobody can force me to feel certain feelings and emotions, to have ties to a third party, you must also think: ok, it is pure hypocrisy to pretend emotions, but the other person? I really have the right to hurt her just because I do not like a genius? And here
successor respect, duty, and the educational force of the law. Why selfish impulse is human and natural, but only if it bears fruit allows the person to live in harmony with others without sacrificing their individuality. The heteronomous moral, mitigated the influence of the sphere of thumb on them, as are the younger sisters of Kantian moral law. It puts into practice the moral law, to ensure their compliance without forcing it, and foster the individual.
rules and obligations are not loops around the neck, but useful and necessary for man to cultivate the strength of will and the good called freedom. The problem today is precisely to have a weak will, as now only relying on the modernist position now only a conservative can not be that mature. The prohibitions are used to this, to give the limits and make it understand its importance. I conclude with the second moral law (there are three but the first to include all) of Kant, which summarizes a bit 'all the talk about the company:
"Make sure you always treat your neighbor as an end and never merely as a means ".
0 comments:
Post a Comment