People say LII, but look at the factual bases for his argument. He doesn't have any. He says we should act the way we should towards each other because we should. Pure dogmatism. Obviously, everyone's argument comes down to dogmatism, but he's one step away from that. He doesn't have a rationale for why we should act according to the CI; according to his theory. EII is more of a possibility in my eyes, because it essentially comes down to mutual respect between human beings, but for harmonious relationships and beneficial living, not because there is a true reason why we should. It comes from his own beliefs and ideas, not from a possible objective foundation.