Kant

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

>It destroys it, but does not replace its truth.  Devilish
>being actually replaces the truth of the categorical
>imperative, which is why it is forbidden, not simply on
>moral grounds (Kant says we "shouldn't" not that we
>"cannot"), but on metaphysical grounds.  Kant's system runs
>like this: "I can't because I musn't" - not "I can't
>because I can't."
>
>ken

I think that you are missing the point: Kant's categorical imperative comes
embedded in, and complement, a political philosophy that's predicated on
the suppression of the practical exercise of power, knowledge (esp.
historical knowledge), & desire for happiness by the people.  What can be
more 'authoritarian' than that?

Yoshie