The British Empiricists and Kant's Ethics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

The British Empiricists and Kants Ethics - Essay ExampleFirst, because of the theory of conatus, atrocious things happen to us because of external and non internal causes. And second, passive emotional states or passions, arise only from inadequate ideas anger, fear, hatred, occur because of ignorance or incomplete dread of their external causes. Therefore, in so far as we have an adequate idea of our emotions and their causes, we pull up stakes not be subject to passions.The British empiricists each(prenominal) cogitate that knowledge is derived from experience alone. This aspect of arriving at knowledge seems quite interesting from the point of view of Locke, Berkley, and Hume. For Locke, our mind is a blank and clean slate, which he calls tabula rasa. Thus, all ideas and knowledge can only come to us and are founded upon experience alone. On the other hand, for Berkeley, all that we ever know are the qualities of an object that our efficiency of vision is capable of sensin g. Hence, it implies that any given object is the summation of its perceived qualities. Lastly, Hume sets out to achieve the limits of our knowledge. Herein, as far as knowledge is concerned, we are special(a) to our impressions and their corresponding ideas, which manifest in constant conjunction through experience. We have no way of knowing what causes them. For Hume, if an idea has no corresponding impression, then it is meaningless, that is, it does not exist.Kants ethics distinguishes between acting in accordance with duty and acting for the sake of duty. The latter are actions that have moral worth, while the power has no moral worth. Moreover, Kant explains another way of determining whether an action is morally good or not. This is presented in The Categorical Imperative. This principle states that before I will a indisputable mode of conduct, I should see to it that my subjective course of action could be universalized as a moral legislation. If my desired act involves c ertain contradictions, then my act cannot qualify asa moral law and must be rejected. However, if it is devoid of contradictions then, it can be morally acceptable.