Theories versus actions

This week we talked about several different things relating to the Enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant, including the Formal Principle of Duty and the Categorical Imperative. Kant’s main reasoning was deontological, or duty based. He believed that we act based on our duty, and set reasoning as the standard for morality. This was very different from Aristotle, who based actions on the end rather than the means. Kant was more interested in why people act rather than what they do. Thus he was similar to Plato, Aristotle’s teacher. Also, he theorized a perfect world like Plato. In both of their utopias, civilization was perfect and man did no wrong. However, the differences were that in Plato’s world the people looked to the World of Forms for guidance, whereas Kant’s perfect world had everyone acting based on their personal morality. Kant’s world was situational ethics to a degree. However, they both were similar in that both tackled the same problems of everyday life. One problem they both had, however, is that both of them stopped at the theoretical stage. They both wrote books and thought and talked about problems but they never really tried to enact them. Philosophers can have a very powerful influence on the world around them if they try. B.F. Skinner is an excellent example. His thoughts were put into action and are the basis for the American school system. Had other philosophers tried to act, the world around us would be very different. The problem is that other people realize this too. They want to keep the philosophers suppressed and tried cutting the problem from the root by murdering Socrates. Unfortunately, it didn't work. Philosophy is a part of humans and we will always philosophize to one degree or another. Let’s just hope it leads to good things.