non and ne. Thus changed, it really means nothing else than: Neminem laede, immo omnes, quantum potes, juva. But as this sense is only reached by a periphrasis, the formula gains the appearance of having also revealed its own ultimate foundation, its d??t?; which, however, is not the case, because it does not in the least follow that, if I am unwilling that something be done to myself, I ought not to do it to others.

The same is true of every other principle or leading proposition of Ethics that has hitherto been put forward.

If we now return to the above question: — how does the law read, in obeying which, according to Kant, duty consists? and on what is it based? — we shall find that our philosopher, like most others, has in an extremely artificial manner closely connected