Categorical Imperative

.docx

School

Capella University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

0953

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by AdmiralSteelAnt93

Categorical Imperative: A View On Morality (Name) (University) (Course) (Tutor) (Date)

Categorical Imperative Categorical Imperative: A View On Morality Morality is an ethical issue that has been discussed from various dimensions by philosophers. When faced with an ethical problem, usually the individual, group or society consults the acceptable standards and the set rules. One morality approach that may befit one community, group or individual may be unacceptable to another. Generally, there exists some common basis of morality acceptable in all societies. Some philosophers agree on some common beliefs yet disagree on others. Major philosophers like Aristotle, Marx, Sartre and Kant have held a broad perspective on the topic of morality as discussed in this paper. Conflicts and tensions in the society emerge from differences in the understanding of morality. Different societies have different set of standards that are not necessarily acceptable in other societies. According to Kant’s (1724–1804) theory of morality, he believed that morality was based on reason rather than emotions and feelings- something that Aristotle referred to as rationality. H e formulated the concept of categorical imperative based on the principle of rationality that would tell if an action was right or wrong. The maxim he taught was to do only that which you would want to become a universal law. The categorical imperative implied that before each human action, there should be reasoning as to whether if everybody did the same would it be acceptable. He holds similar views to Aristotle in that moral behavior was rational and that morality was universal. However, his views on categorical imperative are critically analyzed as contradictory. His thoughts also were not for people to experience emotions and feelings as they helped realize morality. His school of thought was for the honesty and truthfulness in all human behavior, something that varies from one individual to the other. He emphasized that all kinds of dishonesty were unreasonable, except that whose maxim would become universal.

Categorical Imperative Critiques argue that morality cannot be construed on the concept of categorical imperative. The maxim suggested by Kant that “you ought to do that which could become a universal law” cannot be universally acceptable across all borders of ethical questions. According to Aristotle’s school of view, morality is construed to the ethics principles. He views morality as a product of the human soul, where both rational and irrational decisions are made. The rational part of the soul makes the logical decisions that are premeditated and thought about. On the other hand, the irrational part of the soul contains the unseen expressions such as growth, grief and joy. In humans, the irrational soul can also be controlled thus have some aspects of rationality. In contrast to Kant’s theory on categorical imperative, Aristotle argues that the rationality part of the soul is responsible for morality. His argument is that morality can be taught and perfected through practice, an idea contrary to Kant’s view that an action of morality must be preceded by reasoning with a maxim behind. Furthermore, Aristotle argues that a person’s morality is molded by his character not his emotions or his mental capabilities. He explains that since the human heart is after the ultimate good, morality can be achieved through practicing virtues. Happiness according to him could be achieved by creating a balance in everything. The categorical imperative does not concern itself with doing good as advocated by Aristotle, rather which makes it a universal rule can be contradictory from one individual to the other. According to Kant, the good exists within the principle of Universalbility. Aristotle disagrees with Kantian ethics by supporting rational thinking that evaluates the consequences in contrast to the theory that the reasoning/rationality is not affected by the consequences. For an action to be right or wrong, the categorical imperative argues that it is dependent on the situation and the individual rather than the society at large.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help