At one point in it, the author bemoans Latin's failure to linguistically distinguish between the multiple facets of good and evil.
In a 2005 work, Ha Poong Kim argues that its author's "hedonistic view _of_ human motivation is integral" to the arguments presented in this work. At one point in it, the author bemoans Latin's failure to linguistically distinguish between the multiple facets of good and evil. He goes on to state how good and evil cannot be equated with gratification and pain, respectively, because they are a priori principles and how we are freed only through our adherence to the categorical imperative, a view reverse of that previously presented in Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. For 10 points, identify this work of Immanuel Kant, a companion and response to criticism of A Critique of Pure Reason, the second of his three Critiques.
In a 2005 work, Ha Poong Kim argues that its author's "hedonistic view _of_ human motivation is integral" to the arguments presented in this work.
A {Critique of Practical Reason} [or A {Critique of Pure Practical Reason}; or {Kritik der praktischen Vernunft}]