Being Good without Qualifications

Free will must be a will that gives itself autonomy. According to the formula of autonomy, every rational agent is universal and no experience can determine universality. A rational agent may ‘will’ to act a certain way, but because they are rational beings free from sensual temptations, their ‘will’ is what imperfectly rational people ‘ought’ to act. Therefore, a rational agent’s ‘will’ becomes a universal law in which people guided by empirical experiences should abide. A rational agent is only autonomous when one can make judgments not by external “impulsion,” but by “pure practical reason.” Just as Kant states good will is a will “good in itself,” he believes a rational agent is “an end in itself” who becomes the author of the universal law which he will obey and the rest will follow. If a person can act as if one is a law-maker of a “kingdom of ends” who can be responsible for the universal law of one’s people,

During the first marking period, what I learned in AP Calculus is how important it is to remember functions and certain formulas or standards such as slope, the Intermediate Value Theorem (IVT), Limits, Instantaneous rate, Intermediate form, Zeros, etc. Thanks to this, I’ve learned that standards aren’t as hard as I used to remember, from my time in Geometry Honors, rather they are easier to understand whenever I take notes on whatever I can’t remember or I’m having trouble with at the moment. My grade for this marking is somewhat higher than I expected, meaning as a Math student its possible to obtain a higher grade if I actually attempted the homework, I only look at it and attempt like one or two problems sometimes even none. What’s been

Kant thinks that the consequences of one’s actions do not affect the goodness of the will because if a person is wishing for a positive end to a situation, the consequences

Kant believed that no consequence could have fundamental moral worth because the only thing that is good in and of it self is the Good Will. The Good Will freely chooses to do something precisely because it is one’s moral duty, and that duty is dictated by reason.

In the excerpt Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, Kant presents a profound argument that how right an action is, is determined by intention of the principle that is being acted on. He believes that the outcome of an action is irrelevant because it is out of our control, it doesn’t matter if what we genuinely intended is accomplished. But, we can control the will behind the action. He explains, “The good will is not good because of what it effects or accomplishes or because of its adequacy to achieve some proposed end; it is good only because of its willing, i.e. it is good of itself” (124). Kant uses an example of two shopkeepers that treat their customers in the same way, but are in fact motivated very differently. The first shopkeeper gives the correct change to the customer, but for selfish purposes. He is scared of getting caught for trying to cheat an inexperienced customer like a child. Plus, obtaining a good reputation of being an honest shopkeeper improves his business. The second shopkeeper gives honest change to the customer simply because he is an honest man, and it is morally right. Even though both shopkeepers did the

Good will comes from doing actions out of duty. The definition of duty here is similar to the sense of pledge. This is very specific in that the action must be done because of duty, not simply in accordance with duty (Kant 10). Performing actions in this way gives the action itself moral worth. Both duty and moral worth

In The Fundamental Principles Kant speaks of a very comprehensive moral argument. This is of the Good Will in which he says “Nothing can possibly be conceived in the world, or even out of it, which can be called good, without qualification, except a Good

Emphasises was also placed on the intention rather than outcome of an action, as Kant theory claimed that the only way an action is good is if the intention was good, regardless of the outcome. Intentions are founded on different motives; some intentions are based on a fundamental value while some are based on reasoned duty. Kant believed that a person who does a good deed simply

According to Kant’s moral philosophy, a good thing is a good will that stands behind the duty to the moral law. The structure of his law is based on a categorial imperative. The basis of his philosophy is that good is good will. The good will must always be good and maintain moral value regardless of the outcome or result. Actions are morally right in virtue of their motives, which must come from a place of duty and good motive. He believed that everyone should have dignity and respect no matter what their status in the population may be. Any treatment or action from a physician must be done out of the respect of the patient . This includes that health care providers must fully inform the patients about facts, benefits and harms, or even different treatment options.

The subject of good will for Kant is controversial. Kant believes that good will is not based on a reaction to the consequences, either negative or positive, merely by the intention of which the act was made. When an action is done in good will, the reasoning is not emotional (Johnson, 2008). It does not done out of sympathy or empathy for the individual, rather by a sense of duty. This is the controversial part because many believe that while good will is based on positive intentions, the act is performed through a feeling of love for the fellow man. Kant believes that good will focuses on all human beings regardless of feelings of love, friendship, bond, hatred, or lack of caring. This is why the best way to describe it is duty. However, Kant was not implying that no other motivating factor fuels good will. He was simply stating that when there is a dilemma that has the individual questioning the good will or morality of a decision that it is best to look at it from an unbiased view (Johnson, 2008). Removing emotional attachment from the situation has already proven to be helpful in making rational decisions in an otherwise difficult moment.

Kant believed that the one unconditional good thing is good will (Fincke, 2009). In other words, any other candidate for 'good ' – such as courage or happiness – can be turned evil through immoral intentions. For example, it takes courage to stand up for someone getting bullied in the park, however, it also takes courage to bully someone in the park. As you can see, courage without good will, or good intentions, can be the downfall of another person. An argument that is well known to be made by Kant goes as follows; a shoe keeper might do what is

“There is no possibility of thinking of anything at all in this world, or even out of it, which can be regarded as good without qualifications, except a good will.” (Kant, pg.7 393). No other thing that may appear good can be unqualifiedly good, as even “Talents of the mind…Gifts of power…[Other] qualities…Have no intrinsic unconditional worth, but they always presuppose, rather, a good will, which restricts the high esteem in which they are otherwise rightly held.” (Kant, pg.7 393-394). So Immanuel Kant introduces the public to his Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, which results not in simply a grounding work, but one that is utterly groundbreaking. This opener, wholly devoted to the establishment of the importance of will and intention, notes the guiding characteristics of a good will. As enumerated previously, Kant recognizes the plausible potential positivity of plenty concepts, but remains of the mind that none of these are good in themselves without the efforts of a good will to guide and restrict them in a manner that perpetuates their positivity.

Morrison (2011) writes Immanuel Kant founded duty-based ethics, also known as deontology. Kant believed that everything can be used for good, but could also be used for evil. Kant also believed good will is the only good that can exist without clarification. Good will does not give benefit to the person choosing it. Morrison (2011) explains one cannot be ethical if using people to get what they want based on the Kantian view. Additionally, the consequences of the action or the end-result of the action should not be part of the process of decision-making. Kant theorizes what is good and right for one person should be good and right for everyone. Kant’s theory deals in absolutes and does not consider complex issues (Morrison, 2011).

On this, Kant certainly say: “Therefore I need no far reaching acuteness to discern what I have to do in order that my will may be morally good. Inexperienced in the course of the world and incapable of being prepared for all contingencies, I only ask myself wether I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law. If not, then the maxim must be rejected.” Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant, pg 15

The good will is what we want to do unless something external prevents us from accomplishing it. It rests on good intentions, which are at the source of our every action. However, the circumstances we find ourselves into may disrupt our good intentions, and the results may not be what we had expected. On such terms, we should not be held accountable for the negative results, since our very first intention was to do good. I other words, the good will is good in itself, by virtue, and it is independent from any type of inclination.