Talk:Categorical imperative

Kantianism
", but Kant's ethical theories inside much academic work on ethics. " is semantically null. Can someone familiar with the intended meaning change it so that it means anything at all? Thanks. FederalDemocracy (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah! Um... I just sort of changed the meaning of the sentence completely by putting 'are' before 'inside'... I just assumed it was a mistake of missing a word. Hopefully I'm right. Nullahnung (talk) 11:36, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Prevalence in ethics
It is surprising how many of modern deontological ethics writings (non-religious) include some form of Kantianism... not all of them, mind you (though I couldn't name any off the top of my head), but a lot seem to be founded upon the principle that one should consider humans as an end and act accordingly. Nullahnung (talk) 11:40, 8 September 2013 (UTC)