Kant’s Practical Imperative in the Film The Insider Essay

It is important to understand what Kant means when claiming that it is morally wrong to use another person merely as a means to your end when making the decision whether or not

We would come to similar conclusions that Dr. Fox’s actions were ethically unsound if we apply Kant’s categorical imperative; this test asks that we not make exceptions when doing what is morally required. Dr. Fox violated this by authorizing the friend as a translator and violating Mrs. Ansari’s autonomy. Under normal circumstances, in which there is no communication barrier, Dr. Fox would have informed the patient himself. In this situation, the patient’s, autonomy and confidentiality were violated. Furthermore, Dr. Fox violated the means ends formulation, as he treated the friend as a means and not an end. Instead, of respecting Leyla and the friend as autonomous and rational beings, he used the friend as a translator without giving thought to the individual’s opinion, emotions and needs. (Collier & Haliburton, 15-17)

When we are presented with a situation and we want to decide whether an act we are about to perform is right or wrong Kant would suggest to look at the maxims of the act itself and not just the amount of misery or happiness the act is most likely to produce. “We just have to check that the act we have in mind will not use anyone as mere means, and, if possible that it will treat other persons as ends in themselves” (O’Neil, 1985). Kant would want to help these men and women seek help for their drug addiction. Kant would treat

Kant duty of ethics, Close the debate by Hector: 1 moral decision-making: he decides to avoid people because he is aware that he is a misanthrope. 2 Humanistic dimensions into business decisions: another person does not influence him no matter gender, race, age etc., he would hired the best qualified person for a job. 3 Importance of motivation: in business, threating everyone with equity will bring more motivation in the team people would know that any person could get to managerial position by hard work.

Although Immanuel Kant believes truth should be always be told despite the circumstances, is it really in the best interest of the patient in a medical setting? Physicians have a duty to the patient to take care of their wellbeing and that is why they take the Hippocratic Oath. Sometimes you have to be wishy washy with the truth, but only when it is in the interest of the patient and it depends case by case. Bad news can cause a patient to feel hopeless, fearful, and depressive which may cause other problems in any procedure. Kant also argues that confidentiality gives the patient autonomy and self-determination. Full disclosure would help the patient understand the severity of the case and thus, make better decisions in regards to their health.

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.

a dress - which does not in fact suit her - just to make her feel

It is important to understand what Kant means when claiming that it is morally wrong to use another person merely as a means to your end when making the decision whether or not

Has anyone of us witnessed a team discussing an ethical decision involving a specific case study with many conflicting versions of the story? It is interesting to follow. Some of the debate participants feel so confident about being "right" that they will persist until they win the hearts of their opponents. Some participants will just waffle and attempt to analyze the situation from variant dimensions (Lukas 72). Analyzing a specific Case Study relating to terms of confidentiality, this document looks into definitions of morality under two independent systems- Kantianism and Utilitarianism theoretical approaches. This paper seeks to

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

The Insider is a 1999 movie based on real-life events that happened within an unaired 1994 episode of 60 minutes on CBS. Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, played by Russell Crowe, was the Vice President of Research and Development for the Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation and was not satisfied with the way that the third largest tobacco company was going. Wigand was then fired when he began to voice his personal opinion about how he did not agree with how the company was adding various chemicals to make cigarettes even more addictive then they already are. Lowell Bergman, played by Al Pacino, was the producer for 60 Minutes and comes into play when he sees how Wigand has a story to share with the world. Wigand

The movie The Insider literally provides a seeing glass perspective into the summation of ethical issues in businesses that directly affects the consumers physical and psychological health and the alleged methods that the tobacco company would resort to in order to safe guard itself from litigation and from disclosing information that will adversely affect the sale of its sole money making product yet is ultimately crucial to its customers understanding of the contents of the product that they are purchasing and its implications on their personal health.

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

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

Lying the one form of communication that is the untruth expressed to be the truth. Immanuel Kant states that lying is morally wrong in all possible ways. His hatred for lying has made him “just assumed that anyone who lied would be operating with a maxim like this: tell a lie so as to gain some benefit.”(Landau,pp.171) This is true for a vast number of people, they will lie in order to gain a certain benefit from the lie rather than the truth.It is similar to if you play a game of truth or dare, some rather pick a dare because it would release them from having to tell the truth. However, those who do pick truth still have a chance to lie to cover up the absolute truth.People lie in order to cover who they truly are. Even if you lie to benefit someone or something else, it would not matter to Kant because he does not care for the consequences. If you lie but have a good intention it is not the same for Kant, he would argue that you still lied no matter the consequence that a lie is a lie. “ While lying, we accuse others for not being transparent. While being hypocrites ourselves, we expect others to be sincere.” (Dehghani,Ethics) We know how it feels to be lied to by a person, so in order to not have the feeling returned, we hope the person will be truthful. We rather be surrounded by truthful people constantly despite all the lies that some people tell. No