Kantian Ethics, Inalienable Rights, and the Supreme Principle of Freedom of the Will

Free will is a fundamental requirement of Consciousness
Forum rules
Do not ask questions about the model of Reality here. Only discuss principles and practical applications.
Post Reply
User avatar
Studentarious
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 11:33 pm
Contact:

Kantian Ethics, Inalienable Rights, and the Supreme Principle of Freedom of the Will

Post by Studentarious »

In Kant's Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, he goes in search of a supreme principle to ground ethics in, and arrives at a "value which is good without qualification", which he calls, "the good will." He therefore concludes that what is moral is always that which promotes this most basic value (the good will) and what is immoral is always that which obstructs it. He then derives his formulation of the categorical imperative as 1) Do only that which you could will to become a universal law, and 2) Act in such a way as to treat all rational beings (or carriers of a will) as ends in themselves, and never as means to other ends.

I am wondering if conceptions of Ethics such as Kant arrived at, and others such as the Golden Rule, are really just complex formulations of respect for the free will of all which possess a free will. I also wonder if all inalienable rights, such as the right to life, freedom of speech, and liberty, can be reduced to the right to freedom of the will.

Is it the case that all rights and morality can really be boiled down to the right to freedom of the will, or respect for free will, or the responsibility (nay, obligation) to promote the exercise of free will in all?

Is Freedom of the Will a Universal Law? Or even Multi-Versal Law (which holds in all VRs)?

And is Free Will only reasonably limited to prevent the free will choices of one interfere with the free will choices of others?
Last edited by Studentarious on Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:42 pm, edited 5 times in total.
User avatar
Ted Vollers
Curator
Curator
Posts: 11788
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Contact:

Re: Kantian Ethics, Inalienable Rights, and the Supreme Principle of Freedom of the Will

Post by Ted Vollers »

Free will is of such fundamental importance in MBT because it is the free will of each IUOC to interact over the RWW completely freely or to choose to not respond to any given message over the RWW. Thus free will is the basis of Consciousness arising within the LCS and everything developing on from this fundamental Free Will. It is of course important in all other ways but this is the cornerstone.

Ted
User avatar
Studentarious
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 11:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Kantian Ethics, Inalienable Rights, and the Supreme Principle of Freedom of the Will

Post by Studentarious »

Ted Vollers wrote: Wed Apr 18, 2018 5:08 pm Free will is of such fundamental importance in MBT because it is the free will of each IUOC to interact over the RWW completely freely or to choose to not respond to any given message over the RWW. Thus free will is the basis of Consciousness arising within the LCS and everything developing on from this fundamental Free Will. It is of course important in all other ways but this is the cornerstone.

Ted
I understand that. And I assume it is equally important to preserve every individual's freedom to make free will choices in PMR. My question is specific to PMR politics. Shouldn't our laws and rules be centered around respect and protection of everyone's individual free will? Is Freedom of the Will not the Universal Law which underpins all rights and responsibilities?
User avatar
Ted Vollers
Curator
Curator
Posts: 11788
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia
Contact:

Re: Kantian Ethics, Inalienable Rights, and the Supreme Principle of Freedom of the Will

Post by Ted Vollers »

PMR politics is not based upon what should be however. It is based upon what those who have power at a given time can get away with. Tom Campbell describes the Anti-Rats in continuous conflict with the Rats with the Anti-Rats attempting to control and manipulate themselves and all others while the Rats are on the path of evolving towards love. That Anti-Rats can be related to Authoritarians and were once what has been studied as what have been called tribal personalities. I have been told that, per the LCS Guidance, that the tribal personality when under stress becomes what is known as Authoritarians and has been studied since WWII. We are at a world wide peak presently of the cycle of Anti-Rat/Authoritarian control. That is part of the purpose of PMRs where the stress of interaction is so strong that it can create evolution of our code as IUOCs towards love and away from authoritarianism with its control, manipulation and outright theft.

PMRs are not set up to be ideal VRs and without conflict but rather to evolve naturally through conflict and thus to be intense enough to produce the necessary evolution of our IUOCs. That is why PMRs were invented when NPMRs failed to be intense enough to produce results.

Ted
User avatar
Aku'ManiMani
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2021 4:49 am
Contact:

Re: Kantian Ethics, Inalienable Rights, and the Supreme Principle of Freedom of the Will

Post by Aku'ManiMani »

From what I've been able to discern, rights (i.e. "natural" or "negative rights") are applications of the Principle of Reciprocity (PoR) to the motive character of a being, as apposed to just particular actions. This means that one has rights insofar as they're willing to respect the lives and liberties of others, and cedes those rights to the extent that they willfully violate others'. As such, rights cannot be externally granted or revoked, only honored or infringed upon. One only has rights by dint of the quality of one's being, and can only lose them by voluntarily relinquishing a rightful claim(s), or through incurred liability(s); hence why rights are classified as being "inalienable". Kant's "Categorical Imperative" is a maxim in logical accordance with the PoR.

Honoring natural rights/responsibilitie.and acting in accordance with the PoR (i.e. the parameter of justice) is a critical component of morality. However, beyond that, genuine moral goodness can only come from being and freely acting out of love. Once again, Kant was correct in identifying "good will" as the only inherent good; it's also basically another term for "love" -- i.e. care for a being(s) as an end in themselves, rather than as mere means.
Post Reply

Return to “MBT: Principle 1 and Practical Applications”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests