Immanuel Kant's Influence On Moral Philosophy

Immanuel Kant is said by many to be one of the most influential “thinkers” in the history of Western philosophy (McCormick, n.d.), this being said, most of his theories continue to be taught and are highly respected by society. Kant was a firm believer that the morality of any action can be assessed by the motivation behind it (McCormick, n.d.). In other words, if an action is good but the intention behind the action is not good, the action itself would be considered immoral. Those who follow the utilitarian view would disagree, arguing that an action which benefits the most number of people would be considered moral regardless of the intentions behind it. Kant argues that the intention behind an action matters more than the number of people benefited. This theory of morality falls hand in hand with Kant 's concept of good will, and through examples I hope to explain to readers, in a simple way, what Kant was trying to convey.

Kant would disagree with those who do the right thing for the wrong reason. We, as a society and individuals in that society, should act in ways not because it’s easy for us or more favourable, but because its right and moral.

Another topic that Kant contributed to is morality. According to Kant, moral laws cannot be derived from human nature. To put it in other terms, it is not human nature that should be used as a model to how we should behave morally. Kant believed that humans do not always make the right moral decisions because human nature can be flawed at times, often times choosing an animalistic desire over doing something that is morally permissible. In addition, Kant believed that the outcome of human nature is not the central issue when it comes to knowing what is right or what is wrong. Instead, Kant believes that it each of the individual actions that should be analyzed to see if it is morally wrong or if it is morally right. Kant’s point of view about morality is different from previous philosophers, because most of them looked to human nature in order to find the morally right things to do.

Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative is a theory that basically relays the same message that most mothers teach their kids, and that is to do the right thing. The categorical imperative could be easily explained by the Golden Rule about treating others as you would like to be treated. Kant dives a little deep with his theory, however, and breaks the categorical imperative into three formulations. The first formulation is about essentially removing yourself from a situation and doing what is best for everyone. Kant is basically saying that it is unethical to make decisions that affect everyone, but only benefits you. The second formulation is about making sure that

Many of the ethical theorists who preceded Kant attempt to ground moral judgment in the law of God or of a sovereign monarch. Kant recognizes that grounding morality in an externally imposed law compromises the autonomy of the will: in such a case, we act under a feeling of compulsion to a will that is not our own, and so we are not entirely accountable for our actions. We act autonomously only if we act in accordance with a law dictated by our own reason. While earlier philosophers recognize that rationality is the source of morality, Kant is the first to argue that reason also provides the standard by which we make moral evaluations.

In the late 18th century, German philosopher Emmanuel Kant wrote a book titled Groundwork of Metaphysics of Morals. Kant describes the common principles of morality are naturally apply in life. Arguing that rational people act based on moral for the good will of the rational whole. Kant believes that to act morally, there has to be a reason behind it. People that are rational have the capacity to act on free will, based on universal and necessary laws. Kant explains two laws of imperative; Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives. Both imperatives simplified thing that people have to do in society. The hypothetical imperative means to want something and finding different ways to achieve it. An example would be wanting to pass an exam to get

Kant’s philosophy was based around the theory that we have a moral unconditional obligation and duty that he calls the “Categorical Imperative.” He believes that an action must be done with a motive of this moral obligation, and if not done with this intention then the action would hold no moral value. Under this umbrella of the “Categorical Imperative” he presents three formulations that he believes to be about equal in importance, relevance, and could be tested towards any case. The first formulation known as the Formula of Universal Law consists of a methodical way to find out morality of actions. The second formulation is known as

However, Aristotle’s philosophy where one is able to achieve morality after demonstrating virtue in several ways, Kant believed strongly that it is only when one utilizes good will to complete categorical duties that it will result in achieving morality. Kant's ethical theory of what is good creates a uniform standard in which all beings achieve goodness in the same manner. Unlike Aristotle's concept of the good, where one can be sought as good only after years of living virtuously in many different ways, Kant believed that only by utilizing good will to complete categorical duties made man

Kant’s first version of the Categorical Imperative: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law” (Immanuel) This is Kant’s absolute moral law. It is often cited as the golden rule as well. Per Kant, one has an obligation to act on this axiom, and if one does they are morally correct. However, Kant also defined another form of the Categorical Imperative referred to as the Humanity Formula: “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means.” (Immanuel) This second formulation does more to specifically define what Kant saw as universal law. A human is never to be used only as tools (means), and in fact, should be respected equally for their own motives. (Kerstein) A human as defined by Kant comes to “humanity”. That is to say, the traits that make us intrinsically human, such as a free will. (Johnson and Cureton)

Moreover, Kantianism is the ethical theory that German philosopher Immanuel Kant ascribed. According to the theory, the morality of an action depends on whether they fulfill one's duty. Kant believed that the supreme principle of morality was the categorical imperative. He described categorical imperatives as commands one should always follow, regardless of one’s desires. A categorical imperative is formulated if its maxim - the principle one gives themselves when they are about to do something - is universalizable. To determine whether a maxim is universalizable there is a three part test: First, one should state what they intend to do and why they intend to do it. Second, imagine a world where everyone supports and acts on the maxim. Third,

Kant's Categorical Imperative determines the right action to be the one that is capable of becoming a universal law. In this regard, Kant argues that when decisions are made on the basis of human rights and duties, they fit the definition of being ethical because if everyone follows the same action, the world becomes a better place. To apply this test, one should answer the question of "what kind of a world would it be if everyone behaved this way?"

Unlike Utilitarianism however, Kantianism states that ethics is a purely a priori discipline, thus, independent of experience, and that ethical rules can only be found through pure reason. Also contrary to Utilitarianism, Kantianism asserts that the moral worth of an action should be judged on its motive and the action itself, and not on its consequences. Based on these ideas, Kantianism propose that an action is good only if it performed out a 'good will '; which is the only thing that is good, in and of itself. To act out of a 'good will ', one must act in accordance with a categorical imperative. According to Kant there is only one categorical imperative, which is to "act only on that maxim in which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law" (Kant, 528); and can also be formulated as "act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as means, but always at the same time as an end" (Kant, 532). Essentially, the categorical imperative states that your actions must not result in a practical contradiction, which can be determined by conceptualizing all other people performing the same act. To illustrate, if I were

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

Immanuel Kant’s principle is a deontological moral philosophy proposing that people must follow an absolute moral standard that does not differ based on individual conditions. Kant believes an action is ethical if it is done not for one’s own pleasure, but if the act is good in itself. He explains this by stating that each of our actions reflects one or more maxims, a principle or intention upon which we act. ‘Duty’, for example, is an objective maxim because it is “irrespective of all objects of desire”. Kant refers to the objective maxim as the Categorical Imperative, which signifies an unconditional obligation that one should abide by in any situation and is justified as an end in itself.

Moral philosophy is a branch of philosophy which focuses and investigates the ideas of right and wrong and good and evil behavior. Moral philosophers have researched and justified the logical consequences of moral or ethical beliefs.When we think of morals, we think of rules that tell us which actions are right and which are wrong. But, do human beings have the ability to judge for themselves, based on the facts of a situation, what is right and wrong, what they should do and not do? Well, according to Immanuel Kant, who is one of the most influential philosophers of all times, believes that human beings should not be making decisions based on the facts of a situation, but should act according to universal moral codes that apply in all situations regardless of the outcome. Kant refers to these universal moral codes as categorical imperatives and must be fully followed at all times across all circumstances.