Are you suggesting that Immanuel Kant was a communitst? If so I would really like to hear where you got that idea.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
NAACP issues travel advisory for Florida...
- Thread starter Evangelicalhumanist
- Start date
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Kant didn't have Marxist ideas. You'd know this if you read the philosophers themselves and not just stories that are based on them.
Paying livable wages HAS beem successfully implemented in many countries. It is an American trait, I've noticed, to claim thing others are doing and have done just can't be done without it upending business and society as we know it.
Sure.
Because I can't possibly know what it's like unless I've physically done it.
If that were the case, our species would have died out long ago.
I suggest nothing about him.
I never said that he did.
I've no opinion of him or his work.
You'd know this if you read posts carefully.
Let's just say that running a business is an eye opener.
Reality sorts ideas into good & bad.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
You took Kant for Marx. That is all. I backed traced the thread and you confused Kant with Marx. They are different moral systems.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yeah, that is your bias. I have a different one. But yours is the good system and mine the evil one, right?
I only joked that your posts sounded like the infamous Marx quote.
"Communist"? I wouldn't even know that about you.
But at your suggestion, I'd venture "socialist".
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Your trick is that good and bad are relative when you need that and universal when you need that for how a good system works. It is that simple. Your bias is the correct version of moral relativism.
Maybe.
Again, I've no opinion of Kant or his work.
Kant is irrelevant.
His posts smacked of the Marx quote.
No trick at all.Your trick is that good and bad are relative when you need that and universal when you need that for how a good system works. It is that simple. Your bias is the correct version of moral relativism.
Some ideas work better than others.
Paying workers based on their need instead of productivity is bonkers.
Give it a try.
See how it goes.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
That is no possible with moral relativism. They are better to you and worse to me or in reverse in some cases. They are neither better or worse in themselves. They are always relative to someone.
That is your trick, you play a game of contradiction so you can switch between universally good and relatively good as it suits you.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
But it is all relative, unless it is universal. So which standard do you want?
And yet you argue about them.
The one that's relatively better.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
To whom? And do you have any evidence for that? Or can you even do it rationally?
Have you any evidence for your questions?
They're objectively subjective in their presumptive assumptions.
I demand that I may or may not be Revoltingest!
Last edited: