2 Answers | Add Yours
One of the pro points about Immanuel Kant's theory of the moral imperative is that with individual's acting from a sense of universal rightness, according the Formula of Universal Law, moral standards of society at large would be likely to increase and vengeance vendettas would be likely to decrease. A con point to this same issue is that there may be mitigating circumstances that could in future change projected outcomes. For example, using his promise to repay a loan illustration, perhaps between the time of the promise to pay and the payment the person could secure a new employment situation and gains means to repay or an unsupportive relative could have a change of mind and extend financial aid (the reverse situation is illustrated in The Merchant of Venice, in which expectations of repayment fall short due to unexpected circumstances).
Kant's view is split in two. The world we can know (the world as it seems to us) and the world as it is (the numena, the existence as it is in itself(the unknowable.) Faith binds the two and one's has to take faith to live in a moral world. The pro of Kant's view is that we can live in two worlds: one ruled by Newtonian determinism and one ruled by freedom from determinism. The con of kant's view is that the world built on faith may exist only in reason's mind, the imagination, true only to one reliance on one's own postulates. This could be solism and one can never know. One is left alone without support.
We’ve answered 318,989 questions. We can answer yours, too.Ask a question