Kant-debate: just How racist is the categorical imperative?


    Kant was the inspiration for the populist, exclusionary rhetoric of the present? While his heritage is met with hostility in Russia, nationalist, writes Myisha Cherry, Professor of philosophy at the University of California, the enlightenment itself in this Tradition. In the “süddeutsche Zeitung” claimed they, Kant excluded, after he had collected the “ability to think rationally and to act”, the Definition of being human, “certain groups” such as Black. In the drawer of the register of critical social science of the “All-Crashers” so, the phenomenon of “Othering” sorted belong to, a phenomenon, which describes the discrimination against other social groups through the appreciation of the own group.

    Now Kant’s are like some really racist Comments about Black thirty years ago the ridicule Eckhard Henscheids to the victim, who had, however, no political correctness according to current understanding, in the sense of the Scripture, “Eckhard Henscheid/Immanuel Kant: The Negro (Negerl)” has been removed from the book trade. You have to understand, now, Kant’s universal Universal, the ability to reason, as a brutal in-group privilege? After all, cal imperative, according to which every Person “was at any time treated as an end and never merely as a means” to based on this insight, the works. Myisha just a the exclusive authorization of the philosophers, and argues “in contrast to Kantianern” not as a consequence to the use of morality to “Othering” does not appeal, but to “our great Desire” to just an “average, mediocre existence.” Anyone who devalues others includes and excludes to make the group the benchmark, reveals his longing for the boring normality, the compelling logic of the Professor; the need to denounce.