Kant and Equality

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.

Introduction: Kant argues that mere conformity with the moral law is not sufficient for moral goodness. I will argue that Kant is right. In this essay I will explain why Kant distinguishes between conforming with the moral law and acting for the sake of the moral law, and what that distinction means to Kant, before arguing why Kant was right.

An Individual's autonomy can be altered or swayed by many different life circumstances, stages of human life, religion or faith and its many practices as well as mental capacity and comprehension. In regards to my own understanding towards the required reading it gives many compare and contrast between similar yet controversial topics one being of faith and religion another being that of an individual that is experiencing the manic phase of bipolar disorder. Compared to one of Jehovah's Witness' whom is making a decision based on a scriptural doctrine. The examples and practices of these two opposite and controversial topics have absolutely nothing to do with each other, however, I understand how an individual uneducated about the faith can be baffled.

Premature birth; as characterized by Merriam-Webster word reference may be, "the end of a pregnancy after, joined by, bringing about, or nearly taken after by the passing of the incipient organism or hatchling. This is the meaning of fetus removal of which I will survey its moral status. After Roe versus Swim, the Supreme Court at the same time chose that ladies have the privilege of security under the fourteenth amendment; making it adequate to prematurely end a pregnancy inside the primary trimester (Vaughn 119). The fundamental contention on fetus removal is truly a civil argument on human life, and whether it has an incentive from the snapshot of origination. Every single human life is made out of inborn esteem, and has the privilege to

Another lesson that Christians can learn from Immanuel Kant, is his philosophy that is in line with the Golden Rule. The Golden rule is the principle according to which you shall treat others as you want to be treated by them. The Golden rule implies a person to expect nothing in return. It is a guiding principle for a pure act of altruism. It is one of the formulations of the categorical imperative given by Immanuel Kant. Do to others what you would want to be done to you. Christians should analyze and learn that the categorical imperative exists in the Christian teaching of love. Political or social boundaries do not limit love. It is related to the inner quality of life and depends solely on the feelings and actions of an individual. It

Again, the reading from Kant proves difficult to read. However, the part discussing examples of duties I found to be quite interesting. In relation to the last example when it mentions that all human beings should help others in need, I came to question if people actually carry

The physician should be honest and open before the patient give consent to have a cerclage and any treatment afterward. The physicians should be considerate of the patient's feeling, therefore he/she should be as sensitive and supportive as possible. The patient should be provide the information in order to make the right decision. Obviously there are reasons to question the moral value in this case since lying and deception can occur. But it should not be the decision-making in this case. Of course, honest is the fundamental ethic in this case (Drane, 2015).

In his essay writing “What is Enlightenment?” Immanuel Kant defines enlightenment as “man’s emergence from his self-imposed immaturity” (Kant, 1). In order for us to completely understand this definition, we must first understand what Kant meant by “Immaturity”. In the writing Kant defines immaturity as “the inability to use one’s understanding without the guidance from another”(Kant, 1). Furthermore, Kant believes that this immaturity is self-imposed, and that it is the individual’s fault for lacking the courage and resolve to think for themselves, but instead pay others to think and understand for them. I substantially agree with this idea, however, his remarks on immaturity in relation to the government, the way people should live, and religion is quite impetuous and irrational. Likewise, I do agree that people should be able to live freely, and think for themselves, however I do not agree that they have to live without rules, regulations or a government. In his essay Kant says “. If I have a book to serve as my understanding, a pastor to serve as my conscience, a physician to determine my diet for me, and so on, I need not exert myself at all. I need not think, if only I can pay: others will readily undertake the irksome work for me.”(Kant, 1). Kant believes that these guardians restrain our minds and have us lack the capabilities to think for ourselves. However, I believe that these same guardians are those entities that help nurture our mind and enable us to think

Kant and the Categorical Imperative Kant tried to develop a theory of ethics which relied on reason rather than emotion. While he was not anti-religious, he wanted an ethical system which was not clouded by religion, emotion or personal interpretation. He placed emphasis on

Understand human behavior to improve society’s understanding of human beings, or maybe improving medicine to help patients with strange diseases. You can will that maxim to be universal. Let us take the cancer interpretation of experimentation in humans. If my maxim is to improve cancer patients health and do research to understand it better, as well as developing a new medicine, I can will that maxim to be universal, but it shouldn't be a moral law, or in Kant’s words a perfect duty. Here is where Kant allows for supererogatory actions, we can make this will: improve cancer patients health, and do research to understand it better, as well as developing a new medicine, as an imperfect duty. Which is not required to follow, but it would be a good thing to do

Bryan O. Jimenez Professor Anthony Kammas Phil 141g/ Section 49329 April 29th, 2014 Trust Your Own Inner Voice The exercise of one’s reason is what Immanuel Kant promotes in What is Enlightenment (1997) by creating two main environments: the public and the private space. The public sphere is a place to exercise the public reason where individuals are free from obligation of their occupations or vocations. Specifically, individuals are free to write or speak critically, and act freely without any restrictions. Principally, in the public space, individuals have no conditions or hierarchies who tell them to you act in a certain way, so everyone can perform independently. Nevertheless, the public sphere is not the way you act in public; it just

Immanuel Kant was an enlightenment philosopher who went into great detail what enlightenment entitles in his essay “What is Enlightenment” in the eighteenth century. After examining the aspects of enlightenment according to Kant, I plan to critique his concept of enlightenment in four areas, including: his views on the passive citizen and freedom, his view on the free and public use of reason, his views on immaturity, and his views on scholarship and tolerance in enlightenment.

Despite the fact that Kant never expressly states what the primary recommendation is, plainly its substance is proposed by the accompanying judgment skills perception. Sound judgment recognizes among: (a) the case in which a man obviously acts in opposition to obligation; (b) the case in which a man's activities correspond with obligation, yet are not inspired by obligation; and (c) the case in which a man's activities harmonize with obligation since she is propelled by obligation. Kant outlines the refinement amongst (b) and (c) with the case of a businessperson (4:397) who picks not to cheat an unpracticed client keeping in mind the end goal to save his business' notoriety. Since it is not persuaded by obligation, the businessperson's activity

Immanuel Kant concerns himself with deontology, and as a deontologist, he believes that the rightness of an action depends in part on things other than the goodness of its consequences, and so, actions should be judged based on an intrinsic moral law that says whether the action is right or wrong – period. Kant introduced the Categorical Imperative which is the central philosophy of his theory of morality, and an understandable approach to this moral law. It is divided into three formulations. The first formulation of Kant’s Categorical Imperative states that one should “always act in such a way that the maxim of your action can be willed as a universal law of humanity”; an act is either right or wrong based on its ability to be

He persuasively unveils imperatives both universal and hypothetical, the elements of unconventional practical reason, and examples of extreme controversy that force people to consider situations from a previously unconsidered moral perspective; however, Kant’s initial moral work is not without its critique: ranging from