Talk:Immanuel Kant

	This Philosophers related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.
Editorial notes It contains unsourced statements Tagged since June 2016

Rand

Are we really saying that Ayn Rand was a foremost thinker of the C20th and not just a bitter, greedy hack? Or is the irony too subtle?Tombo1bo (talk)

Neither: it is simply a mention that Rand, a lunatic, hated him while sharing a lot with him.--Just relax, and stay funny (talk) 00:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

It's been changed now, before it literally introduced her as one of the 'foremost thinkers of the twentieth century'Tombo1bo (talk)

Ah, that was added by our resident British Objectivist. Figures his edits are patrolled. Copperhead^Hisssssss 15:51, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I fail to see how exactly Kantian morality could ever be associated with randian egoism. Or with libertarianism for that matter. The second categorical imperative is at odds with the libertarian understanding of "voluntarism" (Their conditions for something to be considered a voluntary choice being no more than formalities that could never meet Kant's criteria as is evident if you read what he had to say for freedom in itself, for prostitution, for the rich in his end of all things and so on), let alone with Rand's ethical egoism. AnCap arguments aim exactly to rationalise and justify using another human as a means only to an end. On a sidenote it should be noted that Marx, in one of his very few appeals to morality, appealed exactly to the categorical imperatives to prove capitalism as a system is unethical. People tend to think that surplus value theory is a moral argument, but it actually has no moral component. The only ethical criticism of capitalism he made was based on kantian morality. 94.67.203.101 (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Sexual Orientation

Kant's philosophy wouldn't have prevented discrimination based on sexual orientation, in fact, his theory would have called homosexuality immoral (What if everyone was exclusively homosexual?). Kentuckyball (talk) 02:50, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

In 60 years there wouldn't be a discussion on the matter, that's what. --"Paravant" ^{Talk & Contribs} 03:00, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Aptly named

For example, the aptly named Kant distinguished between phenomena, which are things as they appear to us, and noumena, things as they really are.

For people who are used to the "proper" German pronunciation of his name this seems unnecessarily insulting to the guy. 46.83.216.91 (talk) 15:55, 15 July 2017 (UTC)