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