Talk:Immanuel Kant

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Immanuel Kant article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Philosophy Unassessed

	Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

archive 1 archive
archive 2 archive2

merging of Kantianism

I notice that the article has a suggestion on it that the Kantianism article be merged with it. I am sceptical for the following two reasons. 1) The Kantianism article is a good starting point, but a real article on Kantianism that include some history and some narrative tying it together, which would be a rather valuable article, would also be fairly long, which would make the Immanuel Kant article even longer, and since 2) I think that our Kant article is still lacking some exposition of Kant's philosophy, that's going to make it longer anyway. Jeremy J. Shapiro 20:29, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. This article should be on the man, the other article on his philosophies. Not only is it important that the two are kept separate, it would eventually lead to an enormous article... which would eventually require the two be separated again. I see no good reason to merge the two whatsoever. Seegoon 21:19, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you propose to complete the other one soon, it probably be better to merge them now to avoid forks. If it is later needed to divide, that's not a big deal. And a page on Kant mainly deals with his philosophy; his life wasn't that interesting, you know? Lapaz 23:06, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

disagree kantianism is not Kant. what his thought has become and manifests today should be on its own page, linked from Kant's page. --Buridan 04:48, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dissagree: Article is big enought to fork and Kantism doesn't seem to be the same thing as Kant (the creator). --CyclePat 02:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC) Note: These two article are both forks of each other. Delete both (just kidding) But I think you could definatelly put a small sections talking about emmanual Kant in Kantism... and vis vers. follow the article bicycle! with the history! --CyclePat 02:44, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. There should be an article about the man, and a seperate about the philosophy. Besides, Kant's page is already quite long. --Zoz (t) 17:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. I agree, the man is far different from the philosophy. cheers, --zachjones4 10:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coherent moral philosophy

Pope Benedict seemed to imply that Kant thought that a coherent moral philosophy was not possible without an acknowledgement of the existence of God. Did Kant think this? If so, it would seem worthy of mention on the Kant page. Eiler7 15:35, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe in some parts of his philosophy he says this (I don't know), but I don't think Kant thinks things like the categorical imperative require appealing to God. I could be totally wrong on this though. FranksValli 00:21, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have been looking at the French version of this page and it appears to mention "the existence of God" as a postulate of practical reason. Should I add something along those lines? What is the procedure for incorporating material from another version? Eiler7 20:42, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kant did indeed think God's existence was necessary for morality (see [1]). Kant even makes a so-called "Moral argument for God" {see [2]). Mikker ^... 20:49, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

? Some statements suggest morality requires existence of God, but others do not, "This proof [the moral proof of the existence of God], to which we could easily give the form of logical precision, is not trying to say that it is as necessary to assume that God exists as it is to acknowledge that the moral law is valid, so that anyone who cannot convince himself that God exists may judge himself released from the obligations that the moral law imposes. No!" Critique of Judgement. Sjjb

Some say that Kant`s Birth: April 22, 1724 (Königsberg, Germany) (Now Kaliningrad, Russia)

But he only wrote in Latin and German. He was a Philosopher. He was not a Philosopher born in Königsberg or Kaliningrad. He was just a philosopher. And he did a good job by just being a philosopher. Not so ? Hans Rosenthal (ROHA) (hans.rosenthal AT t-online.de -- replace AT by @ ) (22022006)