Kant and 136B

Kant's prose, in the original, is actually lucid, fluid, and eloquent.  We once read it in a German class just for his mastery of language, when we (or, at least, I) had genuine Desinteresse in what he actually said or meant.

And, in translation, it turns into a verbal wall on which I could break my dense head if I persisted long enough with the effort  :(

And there's no point wondering whether the translators are sadists (writing badly on purpose) or idiots (lacking the ability to read German and/or write English).  It's just that this is what happens when you want a translation to be (more) accurate.  Rest assured that perfectly readable English would also look like gibberish if translated into German by someone concerned with "accuracy".

That said, the reading was about the categorical imperative.  I already read the John Stuart Mill text, where it's pointed out that the categorical imperative can actually be used in very few situations.  I'll go ahead and conjecture a possible reason why that is so.  In many situations, the following two things are unclear:

(a)  whether it is possible to determine by a priori reasoning the consequences of something becoming a universal law, and

(b)  even if that is actually possible, whether the actor in the situation has the ability to make that determination (Kant assumes the faculty of reason to be objective and universal, but that assumptions requires justification).

Other than that, Kant points out that utilitarianism can only be applied a posteriori after experience, etc.  And here's Colour Record No. 136, Side B: