[lbo-talk] theism & ethics [was: Appeal to Ignorance]

[Jeffrey Fisher]

On 5/31/05, Chris Doss <lookoverhere1 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> --- Jeffrey Fisher <jeff.jfisher at gmail.com> wrote:of
> course, kant also thought that while one ought to act
> out of
> respect for the rule rather than out of selfish
> motives, it is only
> right that people who DO act out of respect for the
> rule be rewarded
> for it, and so there must, after all, be a god to
> reward them.
> 
> ---
> 
> Actually Kant thought that it meant the idea of such a
> god and an afterlife must be possible, and that people
> should act as if it were true, if I remember my
> Critique of Practical Reason correctly (it's been 8
> years). Kant wouldn't use a phrase like "must be" to
> describe a being outside the realm of all possible
> experience -- it would contradict the whole of the
> First Critique (one of the most brilliant books ever).
> 

i don't have the material on hand to deal with this properly, but my
admittedly vague recollection is that he considers it a genuine
argument for the existence of god, not an argument for acting as if
that god exists (which would be counter to his whole point that you
act out of respect for the rule and not out of fear of god!!)

it's essentially an argument from morality and a thoroughly a priori one.

while i don't have the primaries here, i did find the following at the
stanford encyclopedia of philosophy:
---
Kant's "moral argument" rests upon a set of claims about the
relationship between a person's leading of a virtuous moral life and
the satisfaction of that person's desire for happiness. Central to
these claims is the specification that Kant gives to the notion of
"the highest good" as the proper object for the moral ("practical")
use of human reason. Within the context of the moral argument, the
"practical use of reason" consists in the exercise of our will to
choose actions in view of — and solely in view of — their moral
rightness. In Kant's technical terminology, in such a choice we will
our actions on the basis of a "categorical imperative." The "highest
good" consists in a proper proportioning of happiness to accord with
the measure of the virtue each person acquires in willing right moral
actions. The highest good thus includes a harmonious proper
proportioning of happiness to virtue for all moral agents. For the
highest good to be the object of the practical use of reason means
that the actions that I will to be moral actions — i.e., actions
chosen on the basis of following the categorical imperative — must
also be actions that will effect a proper proportioning of happiness
to virtue not merely for myself but for all moral agents.
---

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-religion/#3.2

j
--
http://www.brainmortage.com/
Among medieval and modern philosophers, anxious to establish
the religious significance of God, an unfortunate habit has prevailed
of paying to Him metaphysical compliments.

  - Alfred North Whitehead