I'm spotty on his epistemology, but it seems to me that the point about mediated sensory knowledge with the analogy of the ideological spectacles functions as a neat refutation of the Puritan reflex action whether one conceives of it in terms of fruits of obedience or in some sort of "inner witness."
So you haven't read his Critiques
Here is something that I find interesting.
Everyone, like everyone, knows about Kant's Categorical Imperative.
The thing is, is why does such a great thinker end up with what seems like such a silly and absurd notion of ethical behavior?
And forget the arguments given in the Groundwork
I often suspect that most students even in analytical programs forgo reading all the Critiques
, frankly the "third" being the crown of them all.
People go on about the deontological nature of the Imperative, but I think fail to grasp the powerful and striking context surrounding the reasons for Kant's ethical formulation
, yes I mean that emphasis.
And by people, I mean moderately educated folks who probably got rushed through a survey philosophy series.