Self-doubling

Just to clarify something about ethics I thought I would say something about Kant. He was of the opinion that man is his own law (autonomy), that is, he binds himself under the law which he himself gives himself.

Perhaps this reflects much of what society today believes. However, in a more profound sense, this is how lawlessness and experimentation are established. This thinking is not being really rigorous in any more sense than Don Quixote's self-administered blows to his bottom were vigorous. It is impossible for me to be really any more rigorous in A than I am or wish to be in B. There has to be some constraint if it's really going to be earnest. If I am bound by nothing higher than myself and I am to find myself, where would I get the rigorousness as A, the binder, which I do not have as B, who is supposed to be bound, when A and B are the same self?

The maxim which I give myself is not only not a law, but there is a law which is given me by one higher than myself, and not only that, but this lawgiver takes the liberty of taking a hand in the capacity of tutor and bringing pressure to bear.

Now if a man is never even once willing in his lifetime to act so decisively that this tutor can get hold of him, well, then it happens, then the man is allowed to live on in self-complacent illusion and make-believe and experimentation, but this also means: utterly without grace.

SK said, "Christ preached with authority - this "the clergyman" now also does, for in reserve he has the police and the house of correction."