Kantianism
Introduction
Kantianism is a moral theory that derives universal, absolute rules of morality by starting with the human qualities of autonomy and rationality. Immanuel Kant, the creator of the theory, believed that this combination of autonomy and rationality has infinite value. [1] As such, Kant argued that utilitarian viewpoints are irrational because they may ignore this infinite value by aiming to increase the happiness of many through the sacrificing of the happiness of a few, thus treating people merely as means to an ends. [1] Kant therefore argued that morality should not be about measuring outcomes by pleasure or pain, but by a good will. In fact, he believed that morality could not be achieved outside of the qualities
…show more content…
Kant argued that the autonomy inherent in human will creates the conditions by which we can be moral. [2] In contrast, nonhuman wills are said to be heteronomous, as they are driven only by factors outside of their own will. Kant gave the example of nonhuman animals, which have no rational thought and obey only “instincts, impulses, and empirical desires.” [5] Accordingly, Kant described autonomy as a will that is not driven by laws of nature or motivations of pleasure or pain. Only a will that is not a slave to passions is considered truly free, at least in a practical sense. [2] However, Kant makes a distinction between autonomy and actual freedom of will, besides that used in the colloquial sense. Kant's belief in causality led him to say that we do not have a rational way to deduce that we really have free will. For humans to truly have free will, our wills would have to be 'things in themselves' outside of the influences of the world. He claims we cannot know this is true. Although there is no way to logically deduce that we have free will that operates outside of causality, Kant said we do not need this kind of free will to operate rationally. Consequently, Kant said that feelings related to freedom in making decisions are observational evidence and cannot be used as part of an a priori argument in the development of the categorical imperative. …show more content…
[2] Therefore, he argues a categorical imperative is necessary to both develop and lead us to will to do moral rules. A categorical imperative is an unconditional requirement for a person to perform a given action simply because it is their moral duty and regardless of the action's consequences. [1] Kant developed three ways of expressing the categorical imperative. He claimed that all of these were equivalent in that they lead to the same moral law. One way to view this is that acting on one of them would them would lead a person to follow the others as well. [2] Each of them allows us a way to determine absolute moral laws from a different
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
Kant's deontological moral theory also claims that the right action in any given situation is determined by the categorical imperative, which provides a formulation by which we can apply our human reason to determine the right and rational thing to do, which is our duty to do it. This imperative applies to all rational beings independent of their desires and that reason tells us to follow no matter what. By his categorical imperative we
Through his discussion of morals in the Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant explores the question of whether a human being is capable of acting solely out of pure duty and if our actions hold true moral value. In passage 407, page 19, Kant proposes that if one were to look at past experiences, one cannot be certain that his or her rationalization for performing an action that conforms with duty could rest solely on moral grounds. In order to fully explain the core principle of moral theory, Kant distinguishes between key notions such as a priori and a posteriori, and hypothetical imperative vs. categorical imperative, in order to argue whether the actions of rational beings are actually moral or if they are only moral
While Kant’s theory may seem “overly optimistic” (Johnson, 2008) now, it was ruled as acceptable and rational behavior then. Kant believed that any moral or ethical decision could be achieved with consistent behavior. While judgment was based on reason, morals were based on rational choices made by human
On the other hand, there are few to none examples of a Categorical Imperative, because as Kant would believe, they have to be actions that are good in themselves completely. To arrive at the Categorical Imperative, Kant starts off by explaining that an action is good without qualification if done from duty and not primarily from inclination, or ulterior motives. This, in a more simplified manner, means an action is good if it was the right thing to do and a person did it for the sake of duty and not because of anything else, like instincts or feelings. Kant believes there are very few people in this world that can actually live up to the standard of duty. From this point, Kant states that moral worth is determined by the rule or principle by which an action has been decided, not in the purpose to be attained by it. This statement goes back to the difference of means versus ends; is a person’s action based on the mean or is it based on ends? After Kant arrives at this, he then affirms that duty is the reverence for the law. The difference between reason and will is established at this point. Reason, or thought, can be described as theoretical or pure reason, or it can be described as practical reason. Kant describes theoretical reason as determining a given concept, but practical reason is idea of making the concept actual. Will, on the other side, can be broken down to either the “holy will” or empirically mixed
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
Kantian Ethics states that all morality can be reduced to respecting autonomy. This theory has faced criticisms as well as support. Its most plausible idea is that autonomous agents are capable of making their own decisions and even if their choices may not be the best for them, these choices should be respected. However, criticisms of this theory include concerns such as 1) respecting autonomy is not equivalent to respecting the autonomous agent, 2) the theory does not concern (or concerns very little) with non-autonomous agents such as children and non-human animals, 3) it is implausible that respecting autonomy is the only factor determining morality, and 4) respecting others’ autonomy does not follow from respecting one’s own autonomy.
Kant’s third and final formulation of categorical imperative “Formula of Autonomy” states that one must treat the idea of the will of every rational being, as a universal law. This means we should only act as maxims that are corresponding with a possible end. We should so act that we think of ourselves as a member in the universal realms of ends. We are required according to this formulation
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
Aradhya Kunwar 1002375627 James Langlois TUT0015 1. A) In the principle of humanity Immanuel Kant states, “Always treat human being (yourself included) as an end, and never as a mere means” (Shafer-Landau, 147). Here by human beings or humanity Kant is referring to “rational and autonomous beings” (Shafer-Landau, 147). Those beings that can distinguish between morally right and wrong, and have the ability to use this knowledge (do what they know to be morally right) to achieve their goals (rational) and those who can use their intellect to make independent decisions (autonomous).
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
Immanuel Kant discusses many things and has numerous great ideas. However, for the duration of this paper I will be focusing largely on Kant’s ideas on the freedom of the will. Kant was a firm believer in freedom of the will, however; he said that he could not prove that freedom of the will is possible. Rather, that we must realize ourselves as free because if we do not have free will, then we would not be held responsible for our actions. He explains further that the idea of us to not have a free will is irrational because we act as if we are free and we also take our decisions that we make in our everyday lives as serious matters. If we were not free then we would not take these decisions seriously because whatever we chose it would not
In the late eighteenth century, with the publication of his theories on morality, Immanuel Kant revolutionized philosophy in a way that greatly impacted the decades of thinkers after him. The result of his influence led to perceptions and interpretations of his ideas reflected in the works of writers all around the world. Kant’s idealism stems from a claim that moral law, a set of innate rules within each individual, gives people the ability to reason, and it is through this that people attain truth. These innate rules exist in the form of maxims: statements that hold a general truth. Using this, Kant concluded with the idea of autonomy, in which all rational human wills are autonomous, each
He says anything can be in the external world, God, cause and effect, morality, free will but we can never get to know it. The reason why is because although we cannot have knowledge of these things, the moral law (which he calls it) leads to a belief in them (a kind of rational faith). He says reason shows to prove that free will cannot be an effective part of the world because it is deterministic. He justifies his argument by using the categorical imperative. Kant argued that every event in the natural world has a “determining ground,” that is, a cause. So, all human actions, as well as natural events, themselves
German philosopher Kant was first to introduce the Kantian ethics; hence, the named after him. According to Professor Elizabeth Anscombe, Immanuel Kant was Unitarianism’s rival; he believed actions that are taboo should be completely prohibited at all times. For instance, murder should be prohibited. Even though nowadays a person cannot be punished if death is involved as a self defense, from Kant’s perspective this is still prohibited, although sometimes these actions bring more happiness to the big majority of people than sorrow. Kant stated that before acting, one should ask his/her self: am I acting rationally and in a way that everyone will act as I purpose to act? Is my action going to respect the moral law or just my own purpose? If the answer to those questions is a no, the action must be abandoned. Kant’s theory is an example of the deontological theory that was developed in the age of enlightenment. According to Elizabeth, these theories say that “the rightness or wrongness of actions does not depend on their consequences but on whether they fulfill our duty.”( Anscombe, 2001) Kant said that morality is built based on what he called “Hypothetical Imperatives”, but rather principles called “Categorical Imperatives” he referred to it as the supreme principle of morality. (Texas A&M University, n.d.) Cavico and Mujtaba reported on their book that Kant stated that morality