Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative is meant to be a universal principle, that is, a principle for all persons at all time periods in all societies. Both ethical relativists and ethical skeptics deny that there is any such universally valid principle. Discuss the issues that both groups raise in their objections to the categorical imperative.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 10, 2019, 12:59 am ad1c9bdddf
Hello. The solution below, though concise should get you started. Good luck and thank you or using Brainmass.
OTA 105878/Xenia Jones
Immanuel Kant & the Categorical Imperative
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) by establishing the idea of the 'Social Sciences? has come to be regarded as one of the most influential European thinkers of all time. His essay, "Answering the Question: What is the Enlightenment?" defined said age in terms of knowing, learning & thinking - laying down what the Enlightenment revolution was about. Sapere Aude, which in Latin translates to 'Dare to know?, is the motto he pushed forward to his fellow scholars. Dare despite religious conventions, seek using logic, know by facts & reason. For this, he was one of the first to have argued for a 'a paradigm shift' in terms of the circuit of knowledge moving from religion becoming the basis of faith to reason replacing it. He campaigned at thinking 'autonomously, reflexively', free of the influence & dictates of then themes - faith, superstition, the politics of the church. Just as surely as he is deeply influential in the Social Sciences, he was also very much a key thinker in Philosophy, especially in morality and Ethics. Much of his work later on became the concern of the likes of Karl Popper, Hegel, Schelling & Schopenhauer especially the movement on Idealism. Today still, his work is deeply influential in both analytical and continental philosophy. ...
The solution is a 925-word essay describing, explaining and discussing Immanuel Kant's concept of categorical imperative in relation to its debate of being universal and applicable in all societies; the article includes in the discussion the criticism of ethical relativists and moral skeptics against the validity of the principle. A word version of the solution is attached. references are listed for further research.