Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!dr_who From: dr_who@umcp-cs.UUCP Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Kant -- a few more brief remarks Message-ID: <1329@umcp-cs.UUCP> Date: Sun, 31-Jul-83 23:27:06 EDT Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1329 Posted: Sun Jul 31 23:27:06 1983 Date-Received: Mon, 1-Aug-83 22:33:06 EDT Organization: Univ. of Maryland, Computer Science Dept. Lines: 12 Sorry I got cut off before I quite finished my article. That other review of Kant that I mentioned is by Ping-cheung Lo, "A Critical Reevaluation of the Alleged 'Empty Formalism' of Kantian Ethics," *Ethics* 91 (1981): 181 - 201. Lo's argument is basically to emphasize Kant's second formulation of the Categorical Imperative, which is "Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end." Anyway, I think that Kant survives the first round of criticism. But there may be other objections which are fatal. --Paul Torek, U of MD College Park