Criticism Of Kant 's Moral Theory

1339 Words6 Pages
Criticism of Kant’s moral theory Introduction Kant’s theory states that for an action to be considered good, it must be considered permissible for the action to apply on another party without contradiction applying (Herman, 5). It additionally states that humans should not be considered as a means to an end but should be considered as an end themselves. It goes further to distinguish between perfect duties and those not perfect (Reath, 23). A perfect duty, for example, is to always tell the truth at all times without ever telling a lie. This means that even when the lie told is for a better purpose then it should not be told. The theory advocates for honesty at all times no matter what the outcome/result will be. An imperfect duty according to him is the duty to donate to charity he goes ahead and explains that such duties can be flexible at any given time and place. Criticism of Kant’s theory The issue of what makes an act moral is what makes an act moral. It states that not every universal maxim is a moral maxim. Researchers have countered this and claim that it could be trivial or moral. Kant fails to tell us how we can differentiate a moral duty from bad imperatives. It is, however, practicable to universalize the maxim. In Kant’s theory, it is clear on how to distinguish a moral obligation to what can be termed as social etiquette. Someone might be irritated by people who eat using forks and knives and yet the individual uses
Get Access