Ask a few Kant questions, please help

1. Xiao Hong and Xiao Ming both belong to the same category - people, Kant believes that everyone is treated as an end in itself, so Xiao Ming cannot be regarded as a tool for the happiness of Xiao Hong or oneself, and a person as an end means that moral behavior is an act for the purpose of the happiness of others (well-being). That is to say, being good to others because of self-interest, or being good to others for fear that others will not be good for you, or doing something that is beneficial to others on the spur of the moment is not really a moral act.

2. Moral behavior, or simply put, our belief that "things are right" is based on reason, and the essence of morality should be derived from the concept of law; For although everything in nature acts according to the law, only rational beings have the ability to act according to the idea of the law, that is, to act according to the will. So one thing is right because through your rational thinking and action, it conforms to the universal principle of law. For example, loving your neighbor is in accordance with the universal principle of respect for the lives of others, and you recognize this and practice it according to this principle (and this is the motivation of duty), which is moral.

Therefore, an act of instinctive impulse of kindness, or compulsion of customs, is not really a moral act, even if it is beneficial to others.

3. A priori practical rationality is a bit like a pure mathematical logical proof (using logic to verify specific cases based on known universal truths), which is based on repeatedly verified or self-evident truths to test a specific fact to see if it conforms to this truth.

The metaphysics of morality, a book that doesn't sell well, I really don't know there's an electronic version there, and I can't help you with this, so let's search for it.

Kant's reason, which is more a priori than inductive, uses deductive logic to construct the whole world system on the basis of self-evident universal truths, and the extreme development of this method tends to be attributed to idealism, where matter is not important, but spirit is the most important. For self-evident universal truths cannot be obtained by studying specific things.

It is almost clear from upstairs that the key to understanding practical reason is to grasp Kant's concept of freedom. In the Second Critique, Kant said that the so-called practical reason should be empirical, but a priori in relation to the freedom of the will.

Kant. 's writings can be summarized in the following four questions:

1. What can I recognize?

2. What should I do?

3. What do I hope for?

4. What is a human being?

It is Kant's epistemological view of these four questions that addresses these four questions:

Kant believed that knowledge is acquired by human beings through both the senses and reason.

Experience is necessary for the production of knowledge, but it is not the only element. To transform experience into knowledge, reason is needed (Kant and Aristotle.

Again, this rationality is called a "category"), and rationality is a matter of heaven. Human beings gain experience of the outside world through the framework of categories, and the world cannot be perceived without categories. Thus category is as necessary as experience for the acquisition of knowledge.

But there are also some factors in the human category that can change man's perception of the world, and he realizes that things themselves are different from what people see, and people never know the true face of things.

In terms of the law of cause and effect, Kant proposed the categorical imperative and the hypothetical imperative, and believed that the law of causality was the result of human reason, and he agreed with Hume.

He believes that the law of cause and effect does not come from experience, but he believes that the law of nature can be proved, because the law of nature is the law of human cognition. The law of cause and effect is actually a manifestation of human reason.