In Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, he posits regulative principles that guide our reason and provide it aims. Three of these are “manifoldness,” “unity,” and “affinity.” Beyond just discussing them as theoretical, we can see the uses of these three principles on significant display in our investigations turned inward. As part of our search for knowledge of ourselves as human, this is expressed through concepts of gender and sexuality. This contradicts Kant’s ideas that homosexuality is unnatural in the Metaphysics of Morals, instead showing these things to be quite natural and reasonable based on his own philosophy. By examining these three regulative principles individually through the lens of gender and sexuality, this paper will show how we come to understand ourselves and others in our society differently depending on which principle is used. Beyond just being different methods of gaining knowledge, solely focusing on either “manifoldness” or “unity” can have both positive and negative impacts on society, and this paper will assert that the best approach for an equitable society in these human areas is to continue to seek “affinity.”

Hopelessness seems to be a reasonable response to evil in the world, treating it with a realistic outlook. However, this essay argues that hopelessness is counterintuitive to its aim, while hope is the beginning of change. Ideals for us to strive for are shown to be practical and can sustain us in the face of evil, preventing us from falling into hopelessness and denying the possibility of change.