Immanual Kant's Critique Of Pure Reason

Register to read the introduction… He was considered to be one of the greatest thinkers of the enlightenment and is considered “one of the greatest philosophers of all time” (www.britannica.com). At age eight Kant attended a Pietist school and at age sixteen entered the University of Konigsberg where he studied mathematics, however, that is also where he that he developed an interest in philosophy. Due to the death of his father he left the university and worked as a private tutor to assist his family. In 1755 he returned to the University of Koningsberg where he received a doctorate in philosophy. Kant then worked as a lecturer and taught metaphysics and logic at the University of Koningsberg until 1797. It was during that time that “he devoted a lot of his time to writing on various topics although his greatest masterpiece- the Critique of Pure Reason was published only in 1781.” (philosophers.co.uk)
It was within the Critique of Pure Reason that Kant asked the question “What can we know?” (Kant) His answer is “knowledge is constrained to …show more content…
What is described as “one of the most important works of moral philosophy ever written” (Abbott) is the Metaphysics of Morals. It is in this work that Kant argues that “morality is based neither on the principle of utility, nor any law of nature, but on human reason. Reason tells us what we ought to do, and when we obey our own reason, only then are we truly free”. (Abbott) His reasoning states that moral laws have to be based on experience and “being laws according to which everything does happen, laws according to which everything ought to happen” (Abbott) Ethics he finds what ought to happen often does not happen. I imagine Kant is stating that if a person bases moral decisions in reason, that person will do what they ought to do, they will make the correct moral