Because Kant is so difficult to grasp and understand [not necessary agree with] most [90%] of the views of Kant I have came across are misinterpretations, misunderstandings and ending up as straw-man(s).
It is no doubt Kant regarded reason [ranging from rational to pure] with integrity but at the same time Kant understand reason at its purest can lead to illusions. That is why he came up with a Critique of Pure Reason.
In a way, Kant had used reason for relevant good rational uses, to limit [where applicable] and kill itself [where necessary].
Nevertheless there is a very fine line between ‘sanity’ and ‘madness’ for anyone to venture to tap the positive potential from Pure Reason. It is very natural and quite unadvoidable for most to gravitate towards the illusions of pure reason leading to be delusional on its resultants. Here is how Kant portrayed the delicate balance of pure reason.
Kant is very aware of the above when he formulated his system of hermetical system of pure Moral principles [OUGHT] with a corresponding principles in the varied and conditional applied ethics [IS]. Kant relied on an analogon to reconcile his Moral [the pure aspects] and his Ethics [the applied].
N do not have a system and merely toyed with the conditional applied aspects of Ethics which involved chasing moving goal posts.
K moral system establish a fixed goal [not absolute and can be shifted with an earthquake] post, thus establishing a kind of auto-servo, thermostatic’ homeostatic, and self-regulating Moral/Ethical system to enable humanity to progress towards perpetual peace in the future via progressive iterations, control loops and continuous improvements.
The so-called ‘Categorical Imperative’ is not suppose to be imperative nor enforceable in the real world, it is merely a guide like a lighthouse to ensure the individual(s) and humanity do not end up in the rocks.
Kant’s is not pure idealism. Kant’s is Transcendental Idealism which is also Empirical Realism. If you think you are a realist, you may be a Transcendental Realist and at the same time an Empirical Idealist.
Are you familiar with the ‘Zero Defect’ trend in production quality management? Do you think this people who have set a vision for Zero Defect think they can achieve perfect ‘zero defect’ all the time?
No… this ‘Zero Defect’ as a perfect ideal is merely a guide to ensure they strive to meet the optimal results in relation to the actual conditions they are in. Such a concept enable one to strive to expose all the kinks and weakness in a system and maintain it within optimal pristine conditions.
This is the same with Kant’s Summum Bonum, the Highest Good.
Kant deliberately focus on theoretical principles and deliberately avoid the empirical and applied practices due to time constraints. In addition the empirical and applied are too diversified for one person to deal with. This is why the neo-Kantians and others came after to fill the theoretical-empirical gap. Unfortunately some got trapped in the transcendental illusions that Kant warned about.
IMO, the America founding fathers appear to be simply sprinkling some truths and principles intuitively but they are not reasonably grounded within systematic principles.
Kant never claimed “Pure Reason” to be an absolute but defined it within his terms and conditions. If you understand what Kant meant by ‘Pure Reason’ I think you will agree with him subject to that specific qualification.
If I propose distilled water as ‘pure water’ I am sure you can agree with me and we can use such a term for various acceptable purpose conditioned upon its qualifications.
However, in reality ‘distilled water’ cannot be absolutely pure due to the possibility of some other finer contaminants.
Personally I find N views are in alignment with Kant’s overall systematic framework.
Analogy: Kant’s philosophical approach to reality is like the construction of a overall framework of the airplane in an air crash investigation [note pic below]. Kant’s main interest is in building the accurate framework and very less in searching for the pieces.
When the pieces of the plane are found, they are then attached to the framework like a 3D jigsaw puzzle.
N is like one of the searchers for the bits and pieces of the place and if we are fully aware of the whole framework we will be able to place his ‘pieces’ of philosophical views where they belong within the specific locations of the framework of the whole.
Because N’s approach lack the systematic approach, there is no progressive iterations, feedback control loops and continuous improvements to expedite the process of progress of humanity.
Note example of a system with feedback control loops.
Kant System of Moral [Pure] and Ethic [Applied] incorporate the above principles. The Categorical Imperative acts as a Controller. The applied ethics is the Process, output and feedback control.
N’s approach focus on the Processes [human tragedies] and lacks a sophisticated effective fool proof controller and the feedback loop.
Kant presented the above systematic framework within his Critical Philosophy but so far I noted no one has viewed it in this manner.