What is your answer?
Kant does not think that
{ 1 } - there are actions which are of such a nature that their maxims cannot, without contradiction, be conceived as universal law.
{ 2 } - there are actions whose maxims are not contradictory to universal law but which are impossible to will without the will contradicting itself.
{ 3 } - there is only one categorical imperative.
{ 4 } - concrete rules of conduct can be deduced from the categorical imperative but that it serves as a criterion for judging rules of conduct. See p. 324
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 4.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
Kant does not think that
{ 1 } - there are actions which are of such a nature that their maxims cannot, without contradiction, be conceived as universal law.
{ 2 } - there are actions whose maxims are not contradictory to universal law but which are impossible to will without the will contradicting itself.
{ 3 } - there is only one categorical imperative.
{ 4 } - concrete rules of conduct can be deduced from the categorical imperative but that it serves as a criterion for judging rules of conduct. See p. 324
He does. Such an action would be one with the maxim "when I am in need of money, I will borrow it and promise to repay it, though I know I am unable." This maxim presupposes faith in promises that it would destroy if univeresalized.
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
Kant does not think that
{ 1 } - there are actions which are of such a nature that their maxims cannot, without contradiction, be conceived as universal law.
{ 2 } - there are actions whose maxims are not contradictory to universal law but which are impossible to will without the will contradicting itself.
{ 3 } - there is only one categorical imperative.
{ 4 } - concrete rules of conduct can be deduced from the categorical imperative but that it serves as a criterion for judging rules of conduct. See p. 324
He does. For example, there is no logical contradiction in the law that those in prosperity are not obliged to assist those in distress, but the prosperous man cannot will this law without contradiction. See p. 325
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is wrong. Please try again.
Kant does not think that
{ 1 } - there are actions which are of such a nature that their maxims cannot, without contradiction, be conceived as universal law.
{ 2 } - there are actions whose maxims are not contradictory to universal law but which are impossible to will without the will contradicting itself.
{ 3 } - there is only one categorical imperative.
{ 4 } - concrete rules of conduct can be deduced from the categorical imperative but that it serves as a criterion for judging rules of conduct. See p. 324
He does, but he thinks there are more than one formulation of it. See p. 324.
<= back | menu | forward =>
4 is correct!
Kant does not think that
{ 1 } - there are actions which are of such a nature that their maxims cannot, without contradiction, be conceived as universal law.
{ 2 } - there are actions whose maxims are not contradictory to universal law but which are impossible to will without the will contradicting itself.
{ 3 } - there is only one categorical imperative.
{ 4 } - concrete rules of conduct can be deduced from the categorical imperative but that it serves as a criterion for judging rules of conduct. See p. 324
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
the end