Ever since the times of Plato and Aristotle, it has been agreed by philosophers that the conscious power to act outside Of the laws Of nature is the defining criteria for a human Ewing. We have the innate ability to act outside Of the factors Of appetite and passion which Plato explored; the decision to consciously disregard our desire, and fulfill our moral duty. If we display the ability to not simply postpone the desire through prudence and fear of external factors, but to act completely uninfluenced by them, then we show truly human characteristics.
We must create our own moral law, a state of rules and regulations which are pure enough to exist in the world of the forms. It is from this foundation that we may begin to base our duty and moral ideals through rationality, exempt from the physical world. This search for true knowledge is a theme which Emmanuel Kant explored in meticulous detail: “Kant conception of morality is firmly rooted in reason, and it is a departure from other accounts which claim that morality must be based on sentiment or even the consequences of action.
For Kant, doing the right thing is not a matter of one’s character or disposition or circumstances – all of which are or might be beyond ones control. ” (Stateroom, J and Graver, J 2008) We must constantly strive to make the right decision not in terms of personal gain, but in terms of morality. “Act only on that maxim whereby you can at the same time ill that it should become universal law. ” (Kant peg. 87) Cant’s theory Vass influenced by a culmination of previous philosophies, including those of Rene Descartes and David Hum. Incidentally, Descartes’ and Hum’s thoughts on human characteristics took completely opposing sides.
For Descartes the process Of rational thought was the only method Of understanding the world around us. This rational thought promoted by the Greek Philosophers in ancient times and revivalists by the Copernican revolution, was utilized by Descartes in his own mathematical way to dilute knowledge to the point of essence. Using this hysteretic scrutinizing everything supposedly known about the physical world, only one entity remained, that of thought. “l think therefore am” (peg. 87) therefore declares that when all of the factors are simplified in Descartes mathematical way, what remains is the power of consciousness, if nothing else.
Therefore the power of rational thought goes hand in hand with decision making outside of reason, as it is the only thing which exists independent of the laws of the physical world. Hum on the other hand developed thoughts on empiricism. In his opinion knowledge 3 priori: assembled from a mental catalogue Of experiences, disgorged in our minds, and used to piece together complex ideals and morals. Our ideas are quite simply not our own, but belong to our senses and the world around us. In this way we can begin to connect events with their causes, using our senses and basic instincts simply a reaction to stimuli.
Furthermore we are simply an object which is totally susceptible to causality, a member of a constant chain of events which the world consists of. It appears that Hum has categorized the human being as nothing more than a simple computer, with the ability to create a collage of reprogrammed ideals, but unable to generate their own. In order to practice our decisions out of reason we must act outside of experiences: prove that we as humans are much more than the consequences of an action.
We must demonstrate the capacity to cause a series of events, and act on the categorical imperative. In order to succeed as human sociably we must develop our own critique of practical reason. In other words, we must make decisions on the basis of what we ought to do, not have to do. Fifth human being based his/her decisions on unavailability’s then society would be very close to its ideal form which eve can only imagine. Above all we must attempt to break the ‘computer stereotype which David Hum so indifferently created.
