Kant 's Categorical Imperative Essay

I will not use a person 's information for my own profit without his consent. (1) According to Kant’s first categorical imperative, the formula of the universal law, “Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” (Korsgaard) (2) Kant stated that people should act from the maxim or their own personal rule. (3) Therefore, under the rule, using a person’s information for profit without his consent is an irrational action, so it is unethical. (4) According to Kant’s second categorical imperative, the formula of the end in itself, “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 a means, but always at the same time as an end”. (Birsch 6) (5) Kant states that all people are autonomous and it is irrational and wrong if someone use a person as a tool to accomplish his goal. (6) A person is not a lifeless tool and should not be used without his consent, ever and everyone must be free to choose assist other person not. Therefore, under the Kant’s first and second categorical imperative, it is unethical to use a person’s information for profit without his consent.

Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher, specifically a deontologist, has two imperatives: the hypothetical imperative and the categorical imperative. These imperatives describe what we ought to do and are only applicable to rational beings because they are the only beings that recognize what they ought or ought not to do. The hypothetical imperative is when an individual’s actions are reasoned by their desire, so they only act with the intention of fulfilling their desires. The categorical imperative is what human beings ought to do for their own sake regardless of whatever else they might desire. The categorical imperative has two formulations. Kant’s first formulation of the categorical imperative states that one ought to only act on maxims that can be used as universal law. This formulation is based on its urgency and unity in the society. When a maxim cannot be determined a universal law, then it is morally impermissible to act upon it. Apply this formulation to the example of the lying promise: this cannot be willed as a universal law because trust will no longer be a part of society. If everyone were to make a lying promise to get money without retribution, then people will eventually recognize they are being deceived, which will result in a more selfish community. When one wills something as a universal law, then it is for the intention to better the state and community. This proves that the lying promise is not a maxim to live by.

Kant’s categorical imperative is a natural conclusion of reason when searching for a moral guideline that does not depend on previous expense but reason alone. The categorical imperative can be explained in many different ways. Kant offers five formulations in his work groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. The formulations of Kant’s categorical imperative can be considered a test. If your maxim passes the test then your actions under that maxim will be good. The formulations that Kant offers, they are not different rules in themselves, but different ways of stating the same thing. It is important to note that these formulations apply only to your maxim, or what you intend to do. The categorical imperative is based off of the assumption

SPJ is the ethics code that most relates to this cases. The reporter who is writing the story top priority is to seek the truth and report it. A story involving a political figure has to be taken seriously. He/she has to be fair to both parties involved. Even though Senator Adams did not give a comment to the story, a good journalist who wants to report the truth is not afraid to get a comment from a person in Adams office. If no one is available for comment the journalist should publish what he or she have and then continue to update the story. As the journalist they should keep developing the story and to minimize harm. The story is involving one man who is accused of sexual harassment against eight women. Compassion needs to be shown towards the women who have come forward. It takes a lot to stand up to someone such as Senator Adams. The journalist should not name Brock Adams until authorities have charged him. He has rights as well. The main point is to treat both parties with respect and give a voice to the voiceless.

First, I would like to address the teachings of Immanuel Kant. Kant is known for his studies of deontology, or duty ethics, which is “an approach to Ethics that focuses on the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, as opposed to the rightness or wrongness of the consequences of those actions (consequentialism) or to the character and habits of the actor (virtue ethics).” (Mastin) Kant specializes in many ideas, but the ideas I will focus on are: the will, good will, the categorical imperative, and the principle of humanity.

is the good will. A good will is good in itself, not just for what it

By the start of section III, Kant has finished developing the structure of the supreme moral law, were it to exist. He began by analyzing our popular conceptions of morality, and worked toward developing a rational reconstruction of this morality. In line with this effort, Kant specifies the will as the fundamental cause of action for rational beings, and it is the supreme moral law that the will acts for the sake of and from which we derive our duties. This principle, called the categorical imperative, is the “unconditioned conditioner” of the will, in that it is the determining ground for the will, but is not itself determined by any other law.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was arguably one of the greatest philosophers of all time. Kant thought that it was possible to develop a consistent moral system by using reason. Kant theories were focused on a person act and moral duties. Kant believed that he was putting forward something that would help people deal with the moral dilemmas of everyday life, and provide all of us with a useful guide to acting rightly. Kant indentifies a foundation to morally correct action in a form of psychological motivation. Different principles such as fidelity, justice and gratitude play major roles in this field (Close & Meier, 1995; Johnson, 2004; Jones & Carlson, 2001 Solomon, 1996). Kant wanted to base morality in reason. The result would be that two moral acts could never contradict each other.

Deontology is the ethical view that some actions are morally forbidden or permitted regardless of consequences. One of the most influential deontological philosophers in history is Immanuel Kant who developed the idea of the Categorical Imperative. Kant believed that the only thing of intrinsic moral worth is a good will. Kant says in his work Morality and Rationality “The good will is not good because of what it affects or accomplishes or because of it’s adequacy to achieve some proposed end; it is good only because of it’s willing, i.e., it is good of itself”. A maxim is the generalized rule that characterizes the motives for a person’s actions. For Kant, a will that is good is one that is acting by

Immanuel Kant, a renowned German philosopher, once said that we should always " act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it become a universal law.” This statement represents the first categorical imperative, and it is one of the pillars of Kantian ethics; It states that one should always act based upon moral values that would make sense if everyone in the world acted based on those values. Imagine John wants to steal a car ; According to Kant's first categorical imperative, John's action is immoral. John is acting under the maxim of stealing, but life would be nonsensical if everyone acted under this same maxim under all circumstances. The second categorical imperative that Kant proposed states that “Act

For Kant, he starts out by saying, “Nothing in the world—or out of it!—can possibly be conceived that could be called ‘good’ without qualification except a GOOD WILL” (Kant, 2008). Kant further explains this statement through the first and second chapter. He initially says that many things can be considered good such as; judgments, resoluteness, and perseverance can be undoubtedly good but can become bad if the person’s character isn’t good or if their will in using them isn’t good. He further says that a will is not good because of what it leads to but because it’s good in itself.

Introduction: In the following essay I will be presenting premises based on Immanuel Kant’s perspective on the matter of, “Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals”. Once I have outlined Kant’s view on the matter, I will then object to the conclusions, that “Always treat a human being (yourself included) as an end, and never as a mere means” (Kant pg.169), making his whole argument false.

Immanuel Kant's rationality outlines the Universal Law Formation of the Categorical Imperative as a strategy for deciding profound quality of activities. This strategy contains two basic segments. Initially, one makes a proverb and chooses whether or not the proverb can be utilized as a general law for every single levelheaded being. At that point one figures out if every single sound being would need it to be the all-inclusive law. There are no special cases if the proverb passes both parts. An ethical activity as indicated by Kant is if the current issue passes both parts of the Universal Law Formation of the Categorical Imperative. Case in point, if a specialist is gone up against by a friend or family member of somebody who has as of late

Kant argued that a person acts on a ‘maxim’ which he interprets as intentions. He also argues that morality is a set of guidelines that are similar to everyone. In addition to that, human beings have a will; they can make choices. From this, he forms the conclusion that only the ‘good will’ is morally good. Something is good only if the will to do it was in itself good (Lacewing, 2004).

Immanuel Kant is known as the famous German philosopher who argued two main points in his philosophy: that the human mind creates the structure of the human experience and that reason is the source of morality. More specifically, Kant used his philosophy to argue that in order to figure out what is the right thing, we must rely on reason. Unlike several other philosophers, Kant refused to use religion as a method to know what the law was to determine right and wrong, because he believed it was all knowable based on our intellect. Kant’s key principle throughout his philosophy is to assert that the only way a person can achieve good will is by accomplishing it through duty.