Author Retains CopyrightMiller, Katrine Fearon2011-07-132022-10-272011-07-132022-10-2719661966https://ir.wgtn.ac.nz/handle/123456789/25364I want to investigate my Uncle David's doubt whether he ever did a decent action in his life. I never doubted he was a good man myself and I take this opportunity to call in question his basic ethical assumptions and to examine his logic. To be sure Uncle David was psychotic and his convictions about himself were typical of melancholies generally. This makes his doubt, whether he ever did a decent action of general interest, and gives point, I hope, to my comparing this doubt with Kant's doubt as to whether among those who habitually act according to duty anyone has ever acted solely for the sake of duty. Wisdom say's "It is true both the psychotic and the neurotic listen to reason and defend themselves (and we may add accuse themselves) with reasons". This needed to be said, for very few people in New Zealand today take these reasons seriously. They do not think they have the time. The usual drill is to note the self depreciation as a symptom and treat the case with drugs or shock. Edmund Gosse tells us that in the Plymouth Brethren Community in which he spent his youth there was a gentle old man who believed he had committed the unforgiveable sin. No one questioned the truth of his conviction but extended to him a certain sympathy. As a therapeutic measure I think they were right to take his assertions seriously but wrong not to get him to give his reasons in full and make a show of defending his judgement. I propose to open up the question of the moral worth of actions with Uncle David though he is in his grave. I can supply some of his reasons for him.pdfen-NZhttps://www.wgtn.ac.nz/library/about-us/policies-and-strategies/copyright-for-the-researcharchiveElias CanettiImmanuel KantBelief and doubtPathological psychologyTextAll rights, except those explicitly waived, are held by the Author