Moral Philosophy: Kant vs Hume, Hobbes vs Rousseau

Hume believed that moral judgements come from our natural feelings and psychological mechanisms like sympathy, which allows us to share and understand others' experiences.

Kant argued that morality stems from reason, not feelings. He believed that we should act according to universal laws and duty, regardless of personal feelings.

According to Hobbes, humans are naturally selfish and driven by self-interest. This leads to a state of conflict and chaos in society.

Rousseau believed that humans are naturally good and compassionate, but society corrupts them. He believed in a concept of the 'noble savage', a state of pure goodness before the influence of society.

The concept of 'good will' is central to Kant's ethics. It refers to acting for the sake of duty, regardless of personal benefits or consequences.

A state where individuals are inherently self-interested and driven by a desire for power, leading to constant fear and competition.

Kant believed that history has a predetermined endpoint, a 'perfectly just civil institution.' This ideal state is the ultimate goal of historical development, resembling a utopian society.

Herder challenged the idea of viewing all cultures through a European lens. He argued that each culture is unique and should be understood on its own terms, celebrating diversity and valuing different forms of cultural achievement.

The belief that humans are born good, compassionate, and content, living in relative peace and isolation.

The emergence of cooperation, families, and early communities due to environmental challenges.

Herder saw tradition as essential for human development, providing a foundation for identity and cultural continuity. It acts as a guide for understanding the past and navigating the present.

Marked by the establishment of formal institutions and the solidifying of inequalities. This is where property ownership and competition become central.

Herder believed that government arises from practical needs, not inherent human dependence. He argued that humans have a natural capacity for self-governance, suggesting an innate ability to make decisions and live in a structured society.

The natural inclination for humans to be self-preserving and to feel compassion for others.

Wollstonecraft strongly argued against the assumption that women are inherently incapable of reason. She believed women possess the same intellectual potential as men and need equal access to education and opportunities to realize their full potential.

The tendency of humans to desire recognition and comparison with others.

Wollstonecraft compared the subjection of women to the unfairness of hereditary government, highlighting the absurdity of inheriting power without merit. She argues that women, if given the chance, could be more capable leaders than men.

The first acquisition of land and resources, leading to the concept of ownership and individual possessions.

The belief that humans are inherently driven by self-interest and the pursuit of power, even in interactions with friends.

The state of nature is a 'war of all against all' due to constant competition and fear.

The fear of being dominated and powerless drives humans to seek safety and order in society.

Rousseau disagreed with Hobbes, believing that society corrupts humans.

Kant believed that society promotes progress towards a perfect, just, and morally autonomous state.

The tendency for humans to want to be part of society while simultaneously wanting to be self-sufficient.

The ability of individuals to distinguish right from wrong without being influenced by external pressures.

Kant criticized Rousseau's nostalgia for a 'golden age' of nature, arguing that we should focus on building a better future.