Not about Kant

Theoretical deontoloists can scare me. Consequentialists of course make sense though immediate consequences are never enough. Consequences over a period of time and over varying circumstances are critical.

"Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing wonder and awe, the oftener and more steadily we reflect on them: the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me."


"Kant's Joke - Kant wanted to prove, in a way that would dumbfound the common man, that the common man was right: that was the secret joke of this soul. He wrote against the scholars in support of popular prejudice, but for scholars and not for the people."


Joshua Greene makes some excellent points. And I love the structured way in which he demonstrates them, moving gradually from logic seemingly obvious to conclusions that aren't intuitive. To me, that is the mark of an excellent researcher.

The last two days have brought me opportunities to read without interruption. They have given me what I wanted to read about and question. For that I shall be grateful. This is joy.

On an slightly unrelated note, but to vaguely allude to where it all began:

"Fanatacism always means overcompensated doubt."


I really should be writing somewhere else.

Sign in or get an account to comment.