Immanuel Kant Deontology Research Paper

Immanuel Kant, a philosopher, main goal was to discover the answer to how human beings could be genuinely good and kind, apart from the expectations of traditional religions. Immanuel Kant was born in the year 1724 to parents who were extremely modest. His father was a saddle maker who never made an excess amount of money. He was very thankful for his family and all things God had him blessed with. Kant got a late start in his studies, unlike David Hume. It was not until he was in his fifties that he became a professor that acquired a full salary and received a considerable amount of respect. Kant’s family held him to high standards and made it appoint to practice their religious beliefs. As Kant grew in age and knowledge he did not have any orthodox religious beliefs, but still saw the role that religion had played in his parent’s ability to deal with their hardships and blessing and how useful religion could be in creating a society where everyone was united.

In the past few months I have been introduced to several different ethical theories, but three of those theories stood out in my mind, Deontological theory, Consequentialist ethics Rule Utilitarianism and Virtue Ethics theory. Deontological theory a non-consequentialist theory that does not accept consequences as the basis of right and wrong, but focus instead on our duties and intentions of one’s action. On the other hand, Rule Utilitarianism, a consequentialist theory that defines a morally right rule or practice as one that promotes overall good. Virtue ethics believes that one has to have specific character traits like loyalty, compassion and generosity that have moral values in a person without any underline principles or actions guiding them.

Kant was a deontological thinker and according to his theory of the Categorical Imperative, one must find a maxim in respect to abortion which they could universalize in order to discover what to do when faced with unwanted pregnancy. He doesn’t tackle this problem but he could have argued that abortion is immoral in all circumstances as he strongly believed that human life was of infinite value and that it should be protected. Furthermore, he also believed that one of the universal laws was ‘do not murder.’ Having an abortion would break this universal law and end a valuable life. However, he might also have argued that all people should have the right to determine what happens to their own body. In this case, a universal maxim might permit abortion on the

Immanuel Kant was a moral philosopher. His theory, better known as deontological theory, holds that intent, reason, rationality, and good will are motivating factors in the ethical decision making process. The purpose of this paper is to describe and explain major elements of his theory, its essential points, how it is used in the decision making process, and how it intersects with the teams values.

There is very little question as to what action a strict deontologist would do in the scenario for this assignment he or she would unequivocally adhere to his or her duty. The more pressing question, of course, revolves around just where that duty lies. For a deontologist, that duty would lie with the job at hand and its responsibilities. As one who took an oath to only program software in accordance to the company that he or she works for which is essentially operating as an extension of the government that wishes the programmer to 'push the button' and destroy millions of innocent lives in World War II it would strongly appear that such an individuals would consider it his or her duty to effectively start World War III.

Immanuel Kant was a famous philosopher whose philosophical influences impacted almost every new philosophical idea, theory, concept etc. In a sense, he was considered the central face of contemporary philosophy. Kant spent his whole life in Russia. Starting out as a tutor, to then a professor, he lectured about everything; from geography to obviously philosophy. In his early life, he was raised to emphasize faith and religious feelings over reason and theological principles. As he got older though, that position changed. It then became that knowledge is necessarily confided and within the bounds of reason. Now with this in mind, Kant claims many different things that derive from this. There are many different parts and aspects to it which is why it relates to almost every philosophical idea out there. Kant referred his epistemology as “critical philosophy” since all he wanted to do was critique reason and sort our legitimate claims of reasons from illegitimate ones. His epistemology says that we can have an objective, universal, and necessary knowledge of the world, and that science cannot tell us about reality. He claims science cannot tell us anything because it only tells us about the world as it is perceived, whether it’s based on measures, manipulations, experiments and so on. Kant says that we all have knowledge; that the mind and experience work together and that we construct and gain this knowledge by both reason and experience.

Kant’s deontology emphasizes the importance of rationality, consistency, and respect for people in the way we live our lives. In his eyes absolute morals cannot be violated no matter the circumstance and all people could act the same way. This is a requirement of universalizablity which means that these morals that are created by everyone have to be able to be applied to everyone. For example, if someone were to put a gun to your head and say that if you didn’t give the name of a prisoner to shoot they will shoot ten more prisoners. Is this situation rational? Kant says no. By giving up the name of that prisoner you would essentially be killing them. In Kant’s view

A woman's body is hers and hers alone. Nobody has the right to make her do something that she does not want to. However, it is the duty of a parent to care for their child, not abort it and that we should treat everyone as an ends in themselves, not a means to an ends. (Rachel 131) The deontological perspective states that we are to do our duty, whatever that duty may be. When a woman becomes pregnant and has a child it immediately becomes that woman's duty, or parents if both parents are involved, to take care of that child and protect it. By aborting a child a woman is not doing her duty to take care of the child, she is doing the opposite of that. Duties are something that are given responsibilities, not choices we

Deontology considers an action to be right iff it is in accordance with a moral rule or principle. A deontological moral rule is one that (i) is laid on us by god, (ii) is required by natural law, (iii) is laid on us by reason, (iiii) is required by nationality, (iiiii) would command universal rational acceptance, and (iiiiii) would be the object of choice of all rational beings (Hursthouse, Virtue Theory and Abortion, 224). This provides the link between right action, moral rule, and rationality. The deontologist Don Marquis would respond to the utilitarian argument by suggesting that the consequences of abortion are irrelevant because abortion violates a fundamental and unconditional duty.

From his deontological moral perspective, this is what Kant will have to say about this person that her activities are moral in view of the individual's will or expectation of acting. Kant's hypothesis can be ordered as a deontological because actions are not assessed to be ethically permissible on the establishment of results they yield, yet rather on the type of the specialist's will in acting, consequently his activities depend on obligation and not important. Kantianism is based on values of sayings, willing, and the unmitigated objective. An adage is a general run or principle elucidation what a man takes him to do and the conditions in which he takes himself to do it.

Kant’s ethical theory regarding the immorality of abortion highlights that every individual is endowed with some sense of dignity and respect. Based on Kant’s theory, all human behaviors as well as actions are done simply because are considered the right and appropriate things to be done. Additionally, people’s behaviors and actions are weight in terms of their moral appropriateness instead of any other terms or grounds. Kant would assert that the act of abortion is definitely immoral considering the fact that killing another person is illegal and thus

Conceding that in most situations, a lethal autonomous system can make a more ethical judgment than a human soldier, it would be inevitable that even the most sophisticated technology can make mistakes. A mistake in this case would usually result in the death of a civilian. Such mistakes leads to a key objection that the lethal autonomous system would be unable to shoulder any responsibility from its mistakes. While the inevitable killings of non-combatants are common in the modern insurgency warfare due to their close proximity, the proportionality of collateral damage is often accounted for under the JWT. However, the ultimate responsibility of the mistake falls upon the human soldier who pulls the trigger. Despite the advancement of technology,

When it comes to the ongoing debate on whether abortion is a moral thing to do or not, it is often hard to come to a conclusion on which way of thinking is right or wrong or if any way of thinking is wrong to begin with. In the case of Immanuel Kant’s various arguments in the novel Ground for the metaphysics of morals, I believe that Kant would feel that it would be a morally permissible thing to do to abort a fetus, and I feel this way due to his opinions on the differences between a person and a thing and the viewpoint of while the fetus may not be a thing, it’s 1P stage where it cannot self-determine should allow mothers to consider an abortion if that is what they desire.

To properly asses the moral implications of the practice of abortions, a background on Kantian Ethics is required. Immanuel Kant was a German philosopher who lived from 1724-1804. Kant believed the consequences of an action are morally irrelevant. Instead, he focused on the motivation behind an action.

The existence of God is something that most people take for granted. In your upbringing you are taught that God is the most supreme being, the creator of all, infinite and eternal. Taking into account the type of society in which we live in and the fact that it is usually our parents who teach us about God, most people do not even question his existence. Many philosophers who believe in God have tried to prove his existence using many different types of argument. One of these arguments is the ontological argument. It was made famous by the 11th century philosopher Anselm. The ontological argument has three properties: 1. It is an a priori argument. 2. It treats existence as a property. 3. It is