 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (2)recycle big ...and 602 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614128 Today 0 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i've got an oral examination tomorrow. and there's one information i might have to know ... however, i dont find it in my notations and real life person i might ask dont answer the phone. i dont find that information on the internet either. but i remember some philosophy students post here. i already knew it all, so i dont need a real in depth explanation, just a rough explanation so i remember. So: it's about kant's moral philosophy. what do i do when two obilgations collide ? (that's my question) image i have to lie to save someone's life. then the obligation to speak the truth collides with the obligation to save a life. HOW DO I WORK OUT WHICH OBLIGATION I FOLLOW? WHAT'S THE CRITERIA I USE TO WORK THAT OUT? that's the question. a short, but precise answer would be great. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i still laugh at orral exam |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The Imperative |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
this place is full of philosophy students, fucking skiverrs, you'll neverr get a prroperr job you know. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ja? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
THAT'S NOT HELPFULL, MOFOS! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
usually you decide what you are going to do then fit the appropriate theory around your decision, do you not? :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Does this help? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if it is i'd be really shocked. as if the information he needed was to be found on the internet of all places. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
no :/. damn ... i'll try to remeber it myself .......... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Prioritize. All things are not equal |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that's the deal. some DUTIES are more important than other DUTIES. but what's the Criteria to find out which duty is more important? i forgot. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Sorry it has been a long time since I read Kant and it something I am glad I will never have to do again. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
look here read the part that starts with: Ross views the formulations of the Categorical Imperative not as deriving absolute duties, for such duties inevitably result in moral conflicts in which one is obligated to both do and not do an action. Instead, he believes that these duties should be considered prima facie, whereas one duty is to take priority over another on the basis of an intuitive judgment. Lango points out that Ross is unclear about just how this prioritizing is to be made. T. Hill similarly views Kant's formulation not as dictating absolute duty, but rather as representing an ideal toward which one should strive (not necessarily achieve). Lango opposes both Ross and Hill claiming that such informal approaches can be replaced with an approach that is consistent with Kant's ethical system. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the crucial bit, i think, is: "Kant believes that a conflict of duties is logically inconceivable" |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
better articulated: According to Kant's theory: (a) Perfect duties never conflict e.g. the duty not to murder and the duty not to lie never conflict (b) If a perfect duty conflicts with an imperfect duty, then one must fulfill the perfect duty e.g. if the duty to help others and the duty not to lie conflict (i.e. the only way to help others in this situation is to lie), then one must not lie, and hence, not help others (c) If an imperfect duty conflicts with another imperfect duty (and neither conflicts with any perfect duty), one may choose between them according to prudence e.g. if the duty to help others and the duty to develop one's talents conflict (i.e. by developing one's talents in this situation one is not helping others), then one may, according to prudence, e.g., choose to develop one's talents taken (from . |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah, that helps, THX! we did have a formula at school to find out which duty is more important. BUT OBVIOUSLY THAT WAS NOTHING KANT CAME UP WITH. so if the teacher should bring up that question i know how to answer in a more or less sufficient way (pointing out that Kant considered conflict of duties logically inconceivable etc) Thx! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
perfect duties never conflict -- there is a "formula" roughly speaking; look at my previous post. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah, i wasnt that fast. now that's what i was actually looking for. i'll get through i precisely. but .. thanks a lot! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
just follow your heart. that's what i do. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes ... that's exactly the formula we used. when i read that Kant considered it illogical for "duties to conflict" i already thought that what we did at school was somebody else's formula and i got that mixed up ... well .. know that i have the information i can relax, thx again. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
kant wasnt relevant .... i got 13 points, which is like "very good minus". |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
