Since Reppert wants us to comment on Kant’s categorical imperative, I’ll present my Reformed categorical imperative:
First Maxim
Kant: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."
Hays: “Equal treatment if and only if all other things are equal.”
Second Maxim
Kant: "Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end and never merely as a means to an end."
Hays: “If a man does something sufficiently evil, then he forfeits the right to be treated as an end rather than a means to an end.”
Third Maxim
Kant: “Therefore, every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends.”
Hays: “Therefore, every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a just judge in the universal courtroom of just deserts.”
Hays: “If a man does something sufficiently evil, then he forfeits the right to be treated as an end rather than a means to an end.”
ReplyDeleteCan a supralapsarian hold such a view?
RYAN SAID:
ReplyDelete"Can a supralapsarian hold such a view?"
Since you're the one who perceives it to be a problem, it's up to you to unpack your own question.
Ok. Did God not decree to use reprobates as a means unto an end from eternity, logically prior to the Fall? He allegedly, in the divine mind, distinguished from the mass of humanity one set of vessels - who He decreed should know the riches of His glory (the elect) - from another set of vessels - whom He decreed should serve as the backdrop or instrument through which the other set of vessels comes to know God's glory (the reprobate). As the Fall was effectuated so as to secure this plan, I am wondering how one would reconcile your answer with the seeming fact (for a supralapsarian) that God uses the reprobates as means unto ends prior to the reprobates having done anything.
ReplyDeleteI am a supralapsarian too. I just don't think your answer to the 2nd maxim is necessary. God can do with us whatever He sees fit.
While election is unconditional, reprobation is conditional insofar as the sin is a necessary, albeit insufficient, condition for the condemnation of the reprobate. In that respect, election and reprobation are asymmetrical.
ReplyDelete"...reprobation is conditional insofar as the sin is a necessary, albeit insufficient, condition for the condemnation of the reprobate."
ReplyDeleteTrue. But God is the ultimate cause of sin anyways (agreed?), would you not agree that by virtue of the fact God has ordained the condition by which the reprobate is be justly condemned, He has used the reprobate as a means unto an end (Rom 9:22-23)?
Yes, he uses the reprobate as a means to an end. Unlike Reppert, I don't find Kant's imperative at all plausible.
ReplyDelete