Kant & Categorical Imperatives: Crash Course Philosophy #35 

this channel is the reason im passing ethics

5:34 anyone else wondering why Tony had to take a bath at this crucial moment?

"I remember you were a phliosopher, but can you tell me your name?" "I. Kant"

"No son I will not drive you to the mall. Your asking me is a violation of Kant's Secondary Categorical Imperative." "Awww Dad!!"

In my opinion, if Elvira just told the murderer that Tony was home, she would be a Kant.

We learned about Kant in one of my philosophy classes, and when we got to the formula of humanity, we talked about whether or not sugar daddies are ethical. It was an interesting conversation

These Crash Course videos are put together so well. The production value, articulate speaker, and condensed subject matter are all fantastic. Wish I had these around back when I was in school. Great stuff... Bravo!

My understanding of the categorical imperative is not that we wouldn't all want everyone to steal, but that universalizing theft would negate the concept of theft altogether. If stealing were the norm then property wouldn't exist in the way it does today. Stealing would become merely taking. If the imperative was to steal then the concept of stealing wouldn't be possible.

The extremist philosophers are always the most interesting. It's great to hear something a bit different.

In Germany Kant is taught a LOT in philosophy classes and if you wondered, no his wording isn't more understandable in the German original. In fact it is even more confusing since he uses strange formulations like "durch die du zugleich wollen kannst" wich is a very strange usage of "durch".

Why is it I learn more in 10 minutes of watching this channel than I do in an entire semester of first year philosphy at uni????

Awesome, The Good Place from Netflix brought me here. That Chidi boy got me going with the ethics and the philosophy. Way to go CrashCourse !!

I really appreciate these crash course videos. I watch them before my readings, because Philosophy, in my opinion, is very difficult to read.

Immanuel doesn't pun, he Kant.

I was really nervous about my Ethics test today because I didn't feel like my professor went over the information well enough, and we don't have a textbook for me to study. When I found this video, it cleared up all of my confusion about Kant's ethics. Thank you SO much.

Categorical Imperative : What do you think? Hypothetical Imperative :Well I - Categorical Imperative : It doesn't matter what you think!

So I don't think "Chom Chom" when I see a banana, but when I hear "Chom Chom" I think banana.

there's always money in the chom-chom stand

A warm thank you, to each individual involved in this educational production. I greatly appreciate all your efforts towards providing this helpful, and informative resource. Again, thank you all.

I seriously love the way you simplify all the complicated philosophy concepts! Thanks indeed!

OMG I AM SO GRATEFUL FOR YOUR EXISTENCE! I HAVE NO IDEA HOW I WOULD BE ABLE TO GET THROUGH MY PHILOSOPHY ASSIGNMENT WITHOUT YOUR VIDEOS! THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR DOING THIS!

"What is my purpose?" "You pass butter."

I thought I had fully grasped the categorical imperative in my class, but I never actually knew that it meant that something that is wrong in one situation is wrong in every situation for all people. Thank you for clarifying this for me, my exam tomorrow will go all the better because of you! :)

Found this while studying for a DSST, this whole series is amazing and really helping with testing out of Ethics in America. Thanks guys.

I just discovered CrashCourse and I'm already in love, absolutely love this channel and can't wait to learn more!

this helped so much!! Crash Course is amazing, don't ever quit. you explained it way better than my philosophy professor.

These are amazing shows! This is why RU-vid is 10000 times better than TV. Thank you all for making these. You make it amazingly easy for us to learn outside of the normal ways.

OH MY GOD THIS VIDEO HAS HELPED ME SO MUCH!! I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO READ KANT'S GROUNDING FOR THE METAPHYSICS OF MORALS AND I DID NOT GET ANYTHING UNTIL NOW!!! The Green brothers are a gift to humanity.

Morality aside, why would a murderer show up with a machine gun and ask nicely where is Tony, just pretend you're a friend or barge in

I'm very grateful to have found these videos because they are helping me so much in my college level ethics and philosophy courses. It can be hard to understand the textbook but this makes the world of ethics make sense.

I feel bad for the Jews who tried to seek asylum from the Nazis in a Kantian home... :(

wow, considering how hard Kant is this was one of the best episodes up until now, very well written. great job.

Felt like I was drowning in my bioethics honours. I was so prepared to leave the field. This just restored some of the passion. Thank you!!!!

Kant stand philosophy...

Excellent explanation of a complex philosopher, Hank. Bravo!

Love the music at the beginning of the lesson, puts me in learning mode.

today we have learned, kantian aren't great room mates.

So greatly explained sir..i loved it ..i was in trouble with these Immanuel Kant maxims from a long time ..and now I became very much tensioned because I had my exam after some days..sir I am from India ..and have opted philosophy as my graduation course ..thank you very very much sir ,it really helped..!!!!!😊😊

OMG! Thank you Hank for this episode, I was literally just studying this for my test in Ethics

I love Kant. I'm currently reading 'goundwork of the metaphisic of morals'. It really is fantastic and strongly recommend it.

watch a 10 mins video save my hours to try find information/explanation online. good job guys!

Bless CrashCourse for this. My Philosophy lecturer has been too confusing this entire semester.

this is excellent. High production value + accurate/thorough to boot! Thanks

This guy can explain!!! 🙌🙌I just understood Kant's Universal Law now, after soo long...Thank you soo much

Thank you, Hank. You are so much more understandable than my ethics textbook

5:16 Imagine if you had your personal Kant always whispering into your ear.

For me, this is the best of the philosopher's arguments you presented.

You know what? You are the best teacher.. You make stuff more simple and fast and easy to understand! Outstanding work!!

Elivra should tell the truth, always, and say "no." In communication, humans often mean much more than the words coming out of their mouths. In the thought bubble example, the gunman is actually asking "will you help me to kill your husband?" That is the real question being asked, and thus the real answer is "no".

Literally just took a test on this today. You should've posted yesterday

Man I love these videos so much. Thank you CrashCourse for providing us with these videos :)

Was struggling with this topic in my religion and philosophy class, just stumbled across these videos and this has helped to simplify it for me. thanks, will check out some of the other ones.

Since we are talking about morality and all that, are we finally going to discuss Nietzsche sometime soon?

I Kant even...

Kant and Hotline Miami. Two subjects I never thought I'd see combined. Good job!

Really love Kant's take on ethics...

Despite most people agreeing that people should not be "a means to an end", that ends with... children. Our society cares very little for the autonomy or will of our children, and we rationalize by saying "it's for their benefit". But according to Kant's first principal, having "a good reason" to do wrong doesn't make it right. And yet, the social contract that our society (perhaps _all_ societies) made has decided that children don't count as "people we have to act morally towards".

Looking forward to the video on utilitarianism. I've been hoping we'd get to that soon.

Spectacular Hank, Nicole, and Nick !

I love him, he is helping me to learn both english (I'm seeing his videos as a practice to listen people talking it) and philosophy

"I Kan't get no satisfaction"

Great video! I'm glad you got to Kant and how morals don't need supernatural directives.

these videos are extremely helpful. Thanks PBS

Before reading Kant, I arrived to the exact same philosophical manifest using, as my flagship operator, reason (with a reasonably fair concession with regard to general human kindness -- i.e. being less strict when it's obviously and presidingly better for the feelings of myself and others). I think that this, given that I have worked *very very* hard on my personal philosophy, is important -- I believe that my arrival to similar conclusions is a valuable point for any focused evaluation of the true nature of reality ever held in the future.

Thank you for covering Kant, one of the deepest and most complex thinkers of all time. This guy thinks. A really important point to expand on this video. In order to get to these laws from pure reason, you have to start with an axiom. Reason cannot proceed ex nihilo, since the truth it "creates" is always tautological. The axiom Kant relied upon was pretty simple: The only moral good in the universe is a "good will" - or in other words, agency. It's a pretty damn solid axiom. Try to imagine a universe without moral agency - ie, without anyone around to make decisions about what they ought to do. In this universe nothing can be moral and nothing can be immoral. Whatever is, simply is. From this irrefutable axiom Kant proceeds via pure reason to the various formulations of the categorical imperative. It's pretty amazing.

All of a sudden I'm reminded of my love for Arrested Development

excellent, thank you so much. I have been trying to understand Kant for a while now. You rock.

ı spend 40 minutes to understand the article about kant's ethics and ı understood NOTHING, but thanks to you guys in 10 minutes everything made sense about his thoughts :))) sending a virtual hug to all of you :D

The problem with the way you explained first categorical imperative is that you could choose any level of specificity to say that "that is always what should be done". If you said that anytime someone asked you to help them kill someone, and you then did actions to help prevent that killing, I think that would both fit Kant's first formulation *and* be the right moral thing to do. I think the problem was not being specific enough in that example. The question is not "Should everyone lie?" the question is "should anyone lie in this specific circumstance?"

oh my god, chom choms, i completly forgot that was a thing XD

Crash Course Philosophy is easily my favorite RU-vid channel.

I love you Hank. Thanks for being such an amazing educator :)

Lool this comment section is just filled with Kant jokes So childish tbh I just Kant stand it

damm bro, what are you on!! this is amazing,i have been studying my study guide on Kant an di could not retain a thing and here you are literaaly singing it, thank you!!

Simply wonderful, great stuff!

I love that the image for "new Xbox" is an original Xbox.

One problem is if you don't see a certain group as human it allows you to do whatever to them.

I love your videos, the narrator brings everything to life... Thank you

This video taught me more in ten minutes than an entire module of a DE Philosophy course. Thank you Crash Course.

So Kant was the first person to put into words (though different words) the expression "Imagine others complexly".

I have to say Kants morality principles are pretty sound and in many ways are in line with mine...

These videos have really helped me in my philosophy class. Thank you!

Hahaha i keep on looking for a favorite philosophers, so far reaching #35, proud to say my favorite episode... and favorite Philosopher.... genuis indeed thanks CC!!

She wouldn’t be responsible for Tony’s death for knowing that Tony was about to be murdered and announcing, “Yes, he’s home!!!?” Which is far more likely to lead to Tony’s death than the twisted scenario involving a stupid Tony (smart enough to eavesdrop without being seen but not smart enough to run past where he knows the murderer is) that you described.

"Gotta eat to live, gotta steal to eat. Tell you all about it when I got the time!"

I think this is my favorite episode so far

I just woke up to find this video and I'm actually gonna write an exam about Kant in less than 2h time! THANK YOU for the perfect timing!! :)

[Utterly Updated, original below] I was wrong in my complaint about the dumbness of this example. I thought it was CC's fault but the fault lies with Kant. Since the previous example is about a chom-chom (which sounds un-1700s Prussia), and the murderer example was introduced with a "Let's say..." and Kant's first quote therein was clearly not a quote (because "Tony"), I incorrectly assumed that the murderer example was as much a creation of CC as the chom-chom one (presumably?) is. And since it's so dumb and only makes Kant look like a crazy person, I was very wrongly disappointed in CC for including it and so muddying the water. However, as it turns out the murderer at the door example is famously Kant's. I do think CC should have made this clearer, and also acknowledged that it's widely considered a head-scratcher. Google "murderer kant" and the first result is a paper that starts: "Kant's example of lying to the murderer at the door has been a cherished source of scorn for thinkers with little sympathy for Kant's philosophy and a source of deep puzzlement for those more favorably inclined." I'm just saying, maybe point out that this example is problematic. And unclear. And dumb. But still, that's on Kant and not at all on CC. I'm sorry I got mad at you, CC.

I'm a sucker for logically derived rules, but I kant agree with Kant here. (heh) I get the first imperative, but it seems to be understood too simplistically. There are a number of different situations that an act of lying or stealing can be based upon, and those actions can differ in desirability across all of them. In order to follow this rule to its full extent, you must analyze every facet of the surrounding situation and weigh each environmental factor against another. Second imperative seems pretty obviously flawed. Lying and deception can't never be okay. We deceive people as to our real impressions of them to be polite, we deceive people when we play strategy games, etc. Of course, you also have the extreme theoretical case of a murderer again; it is perfectly fine to deceive that murderer to buy time to let others escape them, but technically this would be denying the murderer their autonomy. Personally, I don't think there are any real moral laws; just moral rules of thumb. Breaking a "moral law" is okay in certain situations if you think it will benefit others more. It's not a perfect system where everybody is happy, but that doesn't mean it's not valid.

Thanks This episode really helped me. This series is very interesting !

Nice touch at 5:24 of using the sounds of the 1980's Pong game for the thought bubble animation of the guy trying to evade the person trying to kill him..

1:24 2+2 is four. Minus 1 that's 3 quick maths

The Thought Bubble is animated similarly to a game I've played called The Classroom.

I have an exam on Ethics tomorrow and this is one of the topics to be covered. Thanks a lot!

I lov u HanK, i was depressing about this topic and now i m so happy of finding this video, it encourages me to study harder,.

damn i'm only 2 mins into this video and i've already learned more in that time than i have from my first year of philosophy a level

6:00 Whaa why?! Going by that logic, Tony should be more responsible for his death than Elvira, because it was his impulse to go outside in the first place. By extension, we can also blame his parents that he was born, thus leading him to eventually die.

That was a great refresher course!!!

I just started college and THANK GOODNESS THESE EXIST!!!

If Kant's saying that types of actions are either forbidden or permissible (e.g, "Either you can ALWAYS steal or NEVER steal"), he hasn't thought things through. There needs to be a consideration of the motive for actions (e.g, "Stealing chom-choms because you forgot your wallet is either always or never right").