Talk:Critique of Practical Reason

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Critique of Practical Reason article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Philosophy: Literature / Ethics / Modern High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Ethics
	Modern philosophy

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Germany High‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Umm....yes indeed. That's what I thought.

I think that these "collaborations" should stick to one artilce at most. Maybe one section, now that I think of it...--Lacatosias 13:14, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boring!!!

~~It is an excruciatingly BORING book, but someone has to do it. The postulates of reason... oh shit, Immanuel brother. Can't find a solution, it's all in the noumenal baby!!--Lacatosias~~ 16:50, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geeesh!! Kant is the Lord!! He should be worhipped as a god insetad of Jesus Christ (who may not even have actually existed). I have to strike out a number of truly nonsensical, off-the cuff comments that I made on some of these talk pages.--Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 11:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What dull minds find boring, sharp minds interesting. Robert Brown looked into a boring drop of water and observed interesting Brownian motion.Lestrade 23:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

Editions???

In the dover Philosophical Classics edition, which I now have in my hand, the section consist of a preface, 3 chapters in the analytic, 2 in the dialectic and then the methodology of pure practical reason and the conclusion. The 3rd chapter of the analytic is entitled "of the motives of pure practical reason". It is unclear whether this is a differenc in editions, but its ommission from the page is alarming. Can someone clarify? it seems that some of the points from the chapter have been encompassed into chapter 2 of the analytic.

Incredibly Inaccurate

This article is flat out inaccurate on fundemental matters. In Kant's view - as expressed in this work - Freedom is revealed by the moral law, not God, for one thing. Who wrote this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.91.153 (talk) 05:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article is copied from Spark Notes.

Almost the entire article is copied from SparkNotes, a website that specializes in book summaries. On it every major work of fiction, science or philosophy is summarized in a simple and comprehensible manner, for students to understand it and use it for their classes.

In short, someone copied the article from SparkNotes. ---Max^(talk) 13:46, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Who wrote the original summary of the text?

The Preface and Introduction section states, "He suggests that many of the defects that reviewers have found in his arguments are in fact only in their brains, which are too lazy to grasp his ethical system as a whole". This makes Kant sound a bit too arrogant!

While he does comment about grasping the parts and the whole of his critical system, I don't think he usually makes any comments that are as arrogant and snobby in the actual text.
The rest of the article's original summary of the 2nd critique is okay. However, I would like to later add and edit more content and accuracy to the summary with proper citations.

This is an often overlooked text and I think it would be very beneficial for Kant students to have a more detailed summary of the 2nd Critique since there are very few good summaries and explanations of the book.

Edit: I have found the main original writer of the article and have gone on to do extensive edits and write additional content for this article. MaxMontague4725 (talk) 16:36, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a section on "key concepts" would be useful?

eg.

1. Autonomy of the Will: Moral action stems from a self-governing will, free from external influences and driven by reason alone. This autonomy is the foundation of morality.

2. Categorical Imperative: Moral law is expressed in this universal principle that commands us to act only on maxims that could be willed as universal laws. This principle guides us to act out of duty, not inclination.

3. The Highest Good: The ultimate goal, a state where virtue and happiness are united. While not achievable in this life, the pursuit of the highest good motivates moral action and requires postulating God and immortality.

4. Freedom as a Postulate: Though freedom cannot be proven theoretically, it is a necessary presupposition for practical reason and morality. We must act as if we are free in order to be moral.

5. Moral Feeling (Respect): Respect for the moral law is the only moral feeling. It arises from recognizing the authority of the moral law and our own autonomy as rational beings.

Dagelf (talk) 13:34, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestion! It is a good idea as I have seen a similar section in the Critique of Pure Reason page. However, I will get to it as soon as I can as it also takes quite a bit of time to sort out and create in full. I am debating whether to do your suggestion first or to first add and flesh out some more content in existing sections (e.g., Analytic: Chapter Three and Dialectic: Chapter Two). MaxMontague4725 (talk) 07:54, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]