Sitting in a room. Alone.
Two adjacent chalkboards hang at the corner of the room. A library bookshelf filled with very old philosophy books ranging from behavioralism to phenomenology sits caddy corner. On my right, there’s a large canvas painting depicting an ocean view from a deck, outfitted with a table for two covered by a red tablecloth; place settings and chilled wine wait patiently for the guests.
The walls of the room are made of decrepit brick. There is a long table at the center of the room. I sit at its head. I view toward the end of the room and peer out the lone window into the darkness.
The room is located on the second floor in a small classroom at the back of the building. I am the only one left. The building is large and foreboding, characterized by thick gray stonework and archetypal Gothic architecture. The cloistered main entrance is guarded on either side by two large embattlement towers topped with crenels and merlons. Furman.
Its 1:30am. I need to finish this paper. I need to concentrate. Need. To. Concentrate. Kant. Hypothetical Imperatives. Formulations of humanity. Formulations of Autonomy. Perfect and Imperfect Duties. When will the madness stop.
While I absolutely love Kant, his readings are torturous. At least starting out. After I spend like four hours with the text, it comes alive and I can actually makes sense of his precise vocabularly. That’s the thing, Kant is soooo vocabulary intensive. He uses strict definitions that make reading troublesome. You need to relearn the meaning of the words before you can read. Otherwise it makes no sense. But, once you spend time, and your mind acclimates to the new semantics, sentences become more clear. That’s another things- his sentences are unbearably long. Example: “All imperative are expressed by an ought and thereby indicate the relation of an objective law of reason to a will that is not necessarily determined by this law because of its subjective constitution (the relation of necessitation).” I mean… I understand it… but only because I’ve read the essay five times. Rearticulating his sentences is fun. poo.
Anyway… I like his way of formulating morality the bestest. At least when compared to those utilitarians or emotivists like Hume, Mill, Artistotle and the like. I do have some issues with Kant…though… I can’t really put what they are into words right now.
Anyway… onto the last four parts of this essay. Soooooon.
William Dare 