Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
balkongast

@helles_sachsen @ForeverExpat @Gargron

So the conclusion is that Kant accepts lies in the categorical imperative?

11 comments
Helles Sachsen replied to balkongast

@balkongast

For sure imho! WTF For example to safe a life from the police of a fascist regime? @ForeverExpat @Gargron

balkongast replied to Helles

@helles_sachsen @ForeverExpat @Gargron

But you risk your own life and you accept lies in general.

I believe we are both not deep enough in philosophy, but I am sure that Kant does not accept lies if we look at the categorical imperative.

Helles Sachsen replied to balkongast

@balkongast

Are you christian? What is your problem with lies?

@ForeverExpat @Gargron

Helles Sachsen replied to Helles

@balkongast

Explain me with kant, why every lie is unethical. I am curious.

@ForeverExpat @Gargron

balkongast replied to Helles

@helles_sachsen @ForeverExpat @Gargron

Kant does not accept lies if we consider the categorical imperative.
Religion is not part of the categorical imperative.

The debate about right and not right, what is justice and not justice is part of the debate in philosophy, where we both surely don't have enough knowledge to go into depth.

Helles Sachsen replied to balkongast

@balkongast @ForeverExpat @Gargron "Kant does not accept lies if we consider the categorical imperative"

This is only your opinion. You gave no further source.

balkongast replied to Helles

@helles_sachsen @ForeverExpat @Gargron

Again, YOU have stated the automated Kant being always right. It is up to YOU to prove that being correct.
I just pointed to a paradoxity.

Helles Sachsen replied to balkongast

@balkongast @ForeverExpat @Gargron Never stated "always right". But. Kant give clear logical rules to a ethic where also lying is allowed and a machine can understand this.

Helles Sachsen replied to Helles

@balkongast @ForeverExpat @Gargron There is no paradoxity. You can lie with Kant if you also want that another person lie to you to safe a third persons life?

Helles Sachsen replied to Helles

@balkongast @ForeverExpat @Gargron This is clearly inside Kant. I would love that people lie to me if this safe the life of a person. Every ai would understand the logic behind this?

balkongast replied to Helles

@helles_sachsen @ForeverExpat @Gargron

We are at a dead end in reading the categorical imperative.

Go Up