Alternative Fuel, Global Climate Change, and the Categorical Imperative

Kant's deontological moral theory also claims that the right action in any given situation is determined by the categorical imperative, which provides a formulation by which we can apply our human reason to determine the right and rational thing to do, which is our duty to do it. This imperative applies to all rational beings independent of their desires and that reason tells us to follow no matter what. By his categorical imperative we

The phenomenon of morality has fascinated people for centuries. Since the development of this phenomenon, humans have longed to discover the good and bad in both their actions and themselves. Naturally, countless philosophers have struggled to answer this question of morality. Although none have successfully found a definite answer, they have exhausted an abundance of ways to attack the question. One philosopher, in particular, by the name of Immanuel Kant, attempted to determine the morality of actions by focusing on their nature. As Kant developed his theory, his approach toward proving moral knowledge soon became widely known as Kantian deontology.

Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative, explored in his “Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals” (1785), suggests that if we (i.e., all human creatures) are considered as beings with the capacity to reason, by this standard we must also all share the capacity for moral autonomy and thus, in this sense, human rights should be considered as universal. His deontological position suggests that humans, as members of a shared global community, have a responsibility to behave according to certain standards. This idea of autonomy lies at the core of his argument because he suggests that an action done un-willingly is one which lacks any moral worth. Contradictory to any consequentialist position, an important stance in any human rights debate, Kant

Kant’s third and final formulation of categorical imperative “Formula of Autonomy” states that one must treat the idea of the will of every rational being, as a universal law. This means we should only act as maxims that are corresponding with a possible end. We should so act that we think of ourselves as a member in the universal realms of ends. We are required according to this formulation

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) had an ethical theory dubbed the Categorical Imperative. Within this theory he discusses the morally right and morally wrong ways to go about an action based on experience,

Every concrete idea that civilizations implement in contemporary settings has flourished from past abstract ideologies. Schools of thought in philosophy as we came to know them, suggest that a collection of disciplines, beliefs, and social movements shape our realities and minds. One of the most schools argued upon is the school of morality. When it comes to categorizing morality, two ethical approaches stand in opposition to each other; Deontology versus Teleology (or known as Consequentialism). What dictates morality? What is wrong and right? How can we find a common standard for morality? These questions are some of the most crucial points that philosophers like Immanuel Kant and Jeremy Bentham thought about. However each one of

Therefore, doing the right thing is not driven by the pursuit of individual desires or interests, but by the need to follow a maxim that is acceptable to all rational individuals. Kant calls this the categorical imperative, and he described it thus, “act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” (Kant, 2008). This basic condition through which the moral principles guiding the relations between human beings is expected of all rational individuals, and determines how they express their moral autonomy and equality. All rational individuals who are morally autonomous willingly comply with the categorical imperative. They then use it to determine the form and scope of the laws which they will institute in order to safeguard these important conditions that form the basis of human rights (Denise, Peterfreund & White, 1999). According to Kant, human beings have the capacity to exercise reason, and this is what forms the basis for protecting human dignity. This exercise of reason must meet the standards of universality, in that the laws formulated must be capable of being accepted universally by all equally rational individuals (Doyle, 1983). Various accounts documenting the historical development of human rights overlook Kant’s moral philosophy, but it is very clear that, through the categorical imperative, he provides the ideals of moral autonomy and equality

The Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals by Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) believes in the reasonable and free compliance of one’s will to follow and abide by the moral law. This position provides an ethical foundation for what is recognized as morality. For Kant, the moral value of an act is not determined from its expected consequences, but from the representation of law itself.

Immanuel Kant’s philosophical writings have influenced people all throughout the world. Centuries later, his works still form a major point of reference in studies carried out in the modern world. His writings have brought a new dimension in religion, law and history. Among his many works was the 'Metaphysics of Morals' which is the subject of this paper. His view of morals is that our desires and emotions are categorically imperative, meaning that they are conscience driven. His philosophy is closely related to the golden rule which states that one should always act in accordance to the outcome that will give him the best outcome. The categorical imperative rule of Kant seems to suggest that actions must be universal for them to be

According to MacKinnon & Fiala (2015), Kant’s ethical theory is a deontological theory. A deontology theory is based on “duties, obligations, and rights” (p. 111). The focus of this essay is how Kant uses the ‘Categorical Imperative’ to explain the nature of ethics.

In the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant proposes his philosophy of ethics. In order to accurately approach this topic and present fluent deduction he begins by defining philosophy into three fields. There is “Physics” of which studies the physical world, there is “Ethics” of which is the study of morality and finally there is logic of which serves to study logical principles. Kant then divides the studying into two parts as well, separating it as either “empirical” (serving to study experiences) or “pure” (serving to study concepts). As Kant uses this work to achieve a certain goal it is important to note that within the text he is proposing a pure study of morality, for morality is applied to all rational beings and

“Ethics is the study of the choices people make regarding right and wrong” (Ruggiero, 2008). Environmental ethics, it is more of a study about moral relationships of human beings to, and also the value and moral status of, the environment and its nonhuman contents. Humans have been sharing our lives with nature for many of years; we have to make many ethical decisions with respect to the environment everyday. We have been concentrating on finding ways and ideas to make our lives easier. Over time we have forgotten to take in the immoral consideration of what we might be doing to our environment itself. In the past, future and even

Immanuel Kant was without doubt one of the most influential Philosophers of his time. He was born in Koinsberg, Prussia on the 22nd of April 1724, and died on the 12th of February 1804 at the age of 79. Throughout his life Kant contributed his ideas to many major fields of Philosophy; however his biggest contribution was to the realm of ethics, when he developed the concept of the categorical imperative. He first introduced this idea in 1785 in a book he titled Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. The categorical imperative was a revolutionary idea that contrary to the spirit of its time focused on how the morality of an action was not dependant on its consequences or the intentions of its undertaker, rather solely on the intrinsic moral worth of the action itself. This concept has been challenged since its birth and been often regarded as a rather impractical and often contradicting facet of moral philosophy. Although the previous allegation is true, the ideas behind the categorical imperative give a significant and much needed challenge our modern day notions of morality.

German philosopher Kant was first to introduce the Kantian ethics; hence, the named after him. According to Professor Elizabeth Anscombe, Immanuel Kant was Unitarianism’s rival; he believed actions that are taboo should be completely prohibited at all times. For instance, murder should be prohibited. Even though nowadays a person cannot be punished if death is involved as a self defense, from Kant’s perspective this is still prohibited, although sometimes these actions bring more happiness to the big majority of people than sorrow. Kant stated that before acting, one should ask his/her self: am I acting rationally and in a way that everyone will act as I purpose to act? Is my action going to respect the moral law or just my own purpose? If the answer to those questions is a no, the action must be abandoned. Kant’s theory is an example of the deontological theory that was developed in the age of enlightenment. According to Elizabeth, these theories say that “the rightness or wrongness of actions does not depend on their consequences but on whether they fulfill our duty.”( Anscombe, 2001) Kant said that morality is built based on what he called “Hypothetical Imperatives”, but rather principles called “Categorical Imperatives” he referred to it as the supreme principle of morality. (Texas A&M University, n.d.) Cavico and Mujtaba reported on their book that Kant stated that morality

Since the utopian goal of many philosophers interested in environmental ethics is the creation of an environmentally responsible and just culture, it is incumbent upon us to think critically about how various environmental ethical positions might be integrated with and institutionalized within the existing societies we know and experience.