tl, dr: Kant is philosophically illiterate as regards the interactions between people and the mitigation of harmful consequences via the NAP, and thus his moral framework is bunk.
Discussion
That's a little bit harsh.
Without his a priory judgments system we wouldn't have praxeology (and austrian economics)
Yeah he has some great stuff. He's still wrong. Just because you fuck up doesn't mean you're not also brilliant.
A lot of my own philosophy is Kantian in essence, mostly drawing from the epistemology.
I also do something akin to what Mises did in grounding transcendental idealism in objective, empirical reality via the various compenents of human action.
When I was younger, I formulated something approximating Kant's entire philosophy on my own. As I learned more about the mature of objective reality however, and human interaction, I discovered I didn't need to carry the weight of the world on my shoulders as Kant's morality would tend to imply. Man's happiness is effected by Nature and by God moreso than any servile attitude toward other people's needs.
I must admit that a lot of his work is kindof hard for me to grasp and because I never read it in my native language, it's non-ideal.
I'm quite sure that a lot things got blurred in translation. I don't know if you speak german, but it might be a different story.
Yeah a LOT gets lost in translation. I never read his whole work. I don't have time to lol! I just try to understand it as best I can from multiple sources.
This includes the translation of words into concepts, even if speaking the same exact language.