Kant 's View On Duty Ethics

Kant develops a principle that we must follow in order to act morally. He explains that we have a duty to act morally. Duties as described by Kant “are rules of some sort combined with some sort of felt constraint or incentive on our choices, whether from external coercion by others or from our own powers of reason.” He calls this overall principle the categorical imperative and it is the fundamental principle of our moral duties. All of our moral actions should follow and should be justified by the categorical imperative, and this means that all

First, all individuals do have a duty to what is right, whether they act accordingly or not. All citizens are held to a duty to uphold the laws, if there was no duty then laws would not exist. Morality coincides with being loyal to the laws, being a disciplined person, and living an orderly life. These essentials are all present in Kant’s perception of duty.

Kant’s first proposition is an action has moral worth only if it is done out of duty, such as when someone who has absolutely no interest in donating to the poor does so out of duty. His second proposition is that action has moral worth not because of its aim, but because of the maxim on which it is based, meaning that it would not matter if the intent failed, as long as the principle was good. His third proposition is that duty is the necessity of an action from respect for the law, such as if an individual is in an embarassing spot, they could will the lie, but not will the maxim to lie. Kant argues that everything is secretly done in self benefit, an example can be an individual helping another merely for the fulfilled feeling.

If a woman walks out of a fast food restaurant and sees a homeless man and gives the man her food is this considered acting in accordance with duty? What about if a woman and a child walks out of a fast food restaurant and sees a homeless man and the woman tells the child to give the man your burger? Does this considered acting from duty or in? What is acting from duty, and in acting in accordance with duty anyway? Well, Immanuel Kant (studied philosophy) had a theory “the class of actions in accordance with duty must be distinguished from the class of actions performed from duty.” In English terms when acting from duty your intention is acting morally but, when acting in accordance with duty you will do the right thing for the wrong reason.

Emmanuel Kant has three propositions of morality. One of the propositions is that in order to have moral worth, an action must be from a moral duty. The second proposition is that “action whether the action is in accord with duty has been done from duty or from some selfish purpose is easy”(Cahn 76). The third proposition is that “action accord with duty and the subject has in addition an immediate inclination to do the action”(Cahn 76). Each one of the propositions has a different distinct and they are connected to morality. There are several actions that can be done out of duty, while others can be done out of desire. Each one of these two are used to determine if it’s done in a moral way. Kant gives two examples, one example is about a self-interested shopkeeper and the other is a reluctant benefactor. In the self-interested shop keeper, the dealer is focused on having fixed prices for everyone. He needs the customers to keep coming

Duty-based ethics are based on duty or obligation. Kant argues that there are higher principles that are good in no matter the time, situation, or culture. Therefore, when faced with

Kant’s Duty Ethics Based on the love I have for my children, I would run into my burning house in an attempt to save them. When applying Kant’s philosophy of moral value to my actions, I must consider the categorical imperative, in that “I should never act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (Kant & Ellington, 1993, p. 14). Therefore, I believe that the maxim of my actions would dictate that I put my life on the line for anything and anyone that I love. I’m not sure if this is an accurate analogy, or if maybe the maxim in this instance would be more specific. Such as, if my child is in danger I will disregard my own personal safety in an attempt to save their lives.

Duty for Kant is the underlying role of morality. Our duty and intentions combine to form our will, and the only one thing in the world that is good is a good will. To act according to duty means we are acting according to principals, not according to the final outcome of our actions. Principals is another important factor in this theory, our actions must be congruent with principals that can be made universal. To be universal, the maxim must apply to absolutely everyone, everywhere, and anytime. Another stipulation in Kant’s theory is that we should never treat a person solely as a means to our own ends. It is morally wrong to use someone solely to enhance our own self-interest.

7. Kant’s ethics gives us firm standards that do not depend on results; it injects a humanistic element into moral decision making and stresses the importance of acting on principle and from a sense of duty. Critics, however, worry that (a) Kant’s view of moral worth is too restrictive, (b) the categorical imperative is not a sufficient test of right and wrong, and (c) distinguishing between treating people as means and respecting them as ends in themselves may be difficult in practice.

Leaders are responsible for influencing followers to perform a task, duty, or to be representative of their followers/constituents' wants and needs. In order for a leader to perform their task and duty effectively, they must possess ethics and morals that prized by their followers and that create loyalty among them. Because leaders are supposed to set a strong example of ethical behavior and ethical practices, it is imperative that leadership follow and set morally acceptable behaviors and that leadership conduct itself in a acceptable ethical manner. As such, leadership must conform to certain ethical principles, which Immanuel Kant attempts to define in Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals.

Mr. Chong knows about recent cases of corporate bribery in Malaysia and in the retail industry. There had been scandals regarding foreign investors who bribed public officials or financed government programs to obtain business privileges or competitive advantage (Inkpen, 2010). Moreover, there was a recent case of bribery involving a Jextra’s country manager in the Philippines. More likely, this manager also encountered similar ethical dilemmas like Mr. Chong. Some individual factors that may have driven him to act unethically in the Philippines could have been pressure from the company to expand and gain competitive advantage in the region. Alternatively, he might have simply wanted to advance his career as a country manager, lacked of ethics or did not know the local laws regarding bribery. Additionally, he might not have received or requested support from the top management regarding the social and ethical issues raised in the Philippines. Mr. Chong, as an experienced manager, should have anticipated that he would encounter legal and ethical risks in Malaysia.

According to principle of universalism moral duty of a person could be revealed through reasons, objectively. Kant said that to act morally is one’s moral duty and one’s moral duty is to follow innate law.

Kantian ethics emphasizes on two conditions for an action to be morally good. The first, that an action only has moral worth if it is done for the sake of duty. The second is that an action is considered right if its maxim can be willed as a universal law. Kantian ethics then is working on the basis of duty and universality. In failing to recognize the multiple aspects of morality, Kantian ethics shows inadequacy as a moral theory. (Hinman, 2008)

Many ethical issues have been surfacing in the last decade due to the hand in hand prosper of international business globalization. The ethical concerns include corruption, bribery, human rights issues among many others. Business ethics is a form of professional ethics or applied ethics that examines moral or ethical problems that arise in a business enviroment. It involves the application of moral behavior to business situations (Adeyeye, 2012 p 22). Bribery is the offering, receiving, soliciting, and giving of something of value in order to influence an action of an official or company in offering of legal or public duties. A bribe is a gift that is bestowed in order to influence the recipients conduct and the extent of the influence

Thesis Statement: In order to determine whether a moral issue is categorized as a bribe, the ethical concepts of bribery must first be defined.