PHIL 2100 Macomb Community Is Reason Alone Sufficient for Morality Discussion
Hello, I have some work to do , everything is explained below . one of the movies is attached . also you have to answer the reading review questions .
After watching all three videos for this week, please answer the following questions: Is Kant correct that reason alone is sufficient for morality – a morality that is absolute and that applies to all rational creatures? Further, is Kant correct that any rational being that grasps a moral law is automatically motivated to act on that law? Or, are you more likely to say Hume is correct that reason alone is *not* sufficient for morality: That in order to be *motivated* to act morally we also need moral feelings and a desire to do right? And, further, is Hume correct that, by nature, humans are inclined to feel sympathy and empathy for other beings – especially when those other beings are a lot like ourselves?
(Initial posts should be at least six sentences )
Reading Review #5
- In Sections 3 and 4 (of our first reading) Hume gives two arguments against the idea that “reason” is the source of our moral conduct. Please summarize these arguments as best you can.
- In section #11 (of our second reading) the editors summarize a “two-fold test” that is required by the categorical imperative. What is this “two-fold test”?
- Referring to the “two-fold test” mentioned above in question #2, in section #11 Kant offers two examples that fail the first test and two examples that fail the second test. What are these examples? What conclusions does Kant draw from these four examples?