Comparing Hume And Kant's Moral Theory

Both Hume and Kant made an important break from other logicians in putting forward a morality that does not include a higher being or god, for a man to identify his moral duty.
Our fine sense does not tell us what something is morally wrong. According to Hume, the moral theory was based on his belief only reason can never cause action. What is going on well our five-sense convey sensory information to our mind and we get bad feelings, or we may not but in many cases, we will get a bad feeling, so we see something happened . Hume definite virtue is always convoyed by a feeling of desire, and vice by a bad feeling or pain. We are forced to commit a virtuous action because it makes pleasing feelings, and we kind of avoid doing a vicious act because
it would cause bad feelings or pain. for example, a mother yield to the little kids and said I hate you are terrible little kids will leave you at the mall if we see this we will be oh gosh this is sad that its puts a bad feeling on us, so Hume said that’s when we judge when we said something is morally wrong in so.
Kant uses deontological ethics to base his morality on reason alone. Kant said we do get feelings but not the feeling that tells us something is morally wrong, in so Kant discuss what happened when we make false Promises; make a promise with the intention not to keep it ? Kant’s first example of how a man in need finds himself to force to borrow some money he needs, and he knows that he will not be able to repay it back. The principle of duty derived from the previous analysis is that of a person hoping to escape financial struggle by borrowing money on the pretense that he will repay. However, he sees that he will not get what he needs unless he promises to apply it even he will Gove a lie promise with in fixed of time. In this example, can be stated as follows. When I need money, I will give a lie promise to a leader to get what I need.
The universal law from of this maxim would be that everyone in need money lies to order to get what they need. There is clearly something illogical about this maxim’s universal from. In this case there would be no money lenders of no one ever planned to repay money borrowed to them not even the moneylenders themselves. For this reason.
Kant said we turn our moral maxim into universal and we see if we could well for this to be universal without contradiction.

2)
For an objective reproduction the truth turns out to be an object, something objective, and thought must be pointed away from the subject.
According to Kierkegaard that one can’t have a true religious faith without being completely committed to it . However, one can’t be fully committed to any belief which is based upon some inquiry in which one recognizes any possibility of a future need to review the results Kierkegaard explained go to true church and pray to true God, but he doesn’t in a false spirit then he said the pagan who is worshipping in idol, but it’s completely committed to this for example, someone who going to church every Sunday. However, he keeps looking to his watch wanted time to go fast because he feels boring and he is not truly that commit to it. Another example, think of the other headhunter guy in island, worshipping he is so passionate about this he is prepared to die for this belief, so Kierkegaard said where is the most proof? Is the guy who is going to the motions or the guy going to motions or the guy have a lot commit. Kierkegaard said the object of the way of knowing does not involve inspect an important in our self . For example, when I am willing to do something I will be commit about that things that I want. So, the different of being commit of something with our heart taking of the personal stand to what we committee and we have knowledge something is true rational but not commit to it. According Kierkegaard said the subjective way of
knowing is personal the objective way of knowing makes individual accidental, that means when we related to something in object way it makes the individual accidental because no important part of our self is connect to that object. For example, a man makes an object evaluation in his wife like you are pottery good wife I’m glad that you are re my wife I did not like you as much as Nancy in college but you pretty good than worst all that abjectly her is talking about is true and his wife going to feel bad because he is not relating to her subjective as a person who has mean. Also, Kierkegaard discussed the young girl that doesn’t have a proof, but thinks that she may be loved, which it fills her heart with joy. This may be her faith that makes her feel loved, to her faith could be that way could be something that could a proof that makes her believe it she so commits it to it that could fully with joy.

3)
Nietzsche selected a fight with Socrates/Plato. He hated Socrates and wrote about Ancient Greece. In Twilight of the Idols , he uses Socrates’ famed violence as part of an ad hominem attack, a logical fallacy Nietzsche focused in. Nietzsche’s viewing platform, Socrates and Plato were to Greek society symptoms of societal decay. In his attack on Western Philosophy throughout Twilight of the Idols, he talked about the main weakness of Socrates he said Socrates was a poor man and belonged to the lowest of the socioeconomic classes in Athens. Nietzsche claims that, with tensions the raboopble gets on top, the rabble in this case being Socrates. However, his main argument against Socrates is that the Athenian was decadent, both in method and message. Socrates and Plato represent for Nietzsche this tradition in which philosophers try to figure out what abjectly true the try to use reason the look for absolute because reason alone the have considered as being corruptive and Nietzsche is arguing that we cannot use reason to prove or to get something rational universal objectivities that was really happing is your real of power which is the drive or the desire of truth is actually creating this believe that you have universal rational objection truth in so Nietzsche in sense set Plato over if Plato for example the three parts of the soul Plato wants something that you can grab the intellect and Plato wants to keep the desire of the body out of it because our progresses feeling can cloud our judgment and because our prejudges we end up by thinking something true something good for our favors of relative or Stenger is Plato thinks we need to graph what is morally right or true of just using out intellect not using our senses so Nietzsche is kind of take other side saying “ you are an animal you are throwing in the world out of time you have the powerful feelings and existing you throwing in the world first you start care about things in then you start to develop conscious awareness, moral comments, so Nietzsche wants to make the will of power more important the intellect or consciousness will to power designates what Nietzsche may have thought to be the main driving force in humans – success, desire, and the motivated to reach the highest possible position in life. Resentment is a sensation of annoyance due to a real or made-up injury or felony. For example, resentment of someone that feels about undocumented people that live in their country thy working, while they are without a job they feel joules. Also, when someone just set at home and posting dreadful things about other people to make them feel bad maybe because he feels jealous for that reason he/she is doing that.
.