Kant's Views On The Elements Of Reasoning And Understanding

In the 1997 film Extreme Measures a young British doctor, Guy Luthan, who is serving a residency in a New York hospital, is faced with some difficult moral and professional dilemmas. This film used Dr. Luthan's dilemmas, which dealt with these sensitive issues of doing what is right regardless of

Philippa Foot's Hypothetical Imperatives Philippa Foot finds trouble with the arguments of Kant, who said that it was necessary to distinguish moral judgments from hypothetical imperatives. Although this may have become an unquestionable truth, Foot says that this is a misunderstanding. Kant defined a hypothetical imperative as an action that addresses

Kant explains that a plausible motivation could be either desire or fear of consequences, and these would be hypothetical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives are when rational beings use means in order to achieve an end. Categorical imperatives, however, are ends in of itself. He says that actions are only good if they are carried out "just because," which would be a categorical imperative. However, he argues that actions are usually not assumed for the sake of duty alone but because of some self-interest, which forces them to act out that action where they wouldn't have otherwise. This is evident when Kant states that "in fact,

Out of Control The phenomenon of morality has fascinated people for centuries. Since the development of this phenomenon, humans have longed to discover the good and bad in both their actions and themselves. Naturally, countless philosophers have struggled to answer this question of morality. Although none have successfully found a definite answer, they have exhausted an abundance of ways to attack the question. One philosopher, in particular, by the name of Immanuel Kant, attempted to determine the morality of actions by focusing on their nature. As Kant developed his theory, his approach toward proving moral knowledge soon became widely known as Kantian deontology.

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.

Kant sees the categorical imperative as the supreme principle of morality because it can be universally applied to any situation. On the other hand, the hypothetical imperative requires a command of reason based on logic to be applied to a hypothetical situation. The hypothetical imperative is based on the idea that an action might possibly lead to a desired end. However, the categorical imperative commands an action or principle which is seen as essential but it does not reference the actual ends. The three categorical imperative have resulted in the debate among political science about how the ends is not the main purpose. This has caused a debate about what type of political system Kant is leaning towards because the means is seen as more important than the end

Kant’s categorical imperative comes from Kant’s Deontology, the work of Immanuel Kant. Categorical imperative is defined as “act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.”. This ideaology believes that an act should be judge based upon its ability to be willed as a universal law an apply to everyone. Under Kant’s categorical imperative something is right or wrong if it can be applied to

Kant and Deontological Theory Immanuel Kant was a moral philosopher. His theory, better known as deontological theory, holds that intent, reason, rationality, and good will are motivating factors in the ethical decision making process. The purpose of this paper is to describe and explain major elements of his theory, its essential

Kant identified two types of hypothetical imperatives, ‘technical’ and ‘assertoric’. Technical imperatives are desires that may or may not be shared by others, the desire varies between individuals. Moreover, assertoric imperatives are desires that are shared by the majority of people. Consequently, assertoric imperatives are often assumed although they are not as common as often believed. Contrastingly, categorical imperatives are not founded on desires. Categorical imperatives apply in whatever situation, and is more based on moral principles, such as being truthful regardless of ones own desires. Therefore, Kant stated that categorical imperatives are established by reasoned duties, hence why he referred to it as pure practical

Through Kant’s views of reasoning, I believe that the ideal relationship shared between humans is based off of our unique ability to be able to decipher between information shared to us by others, though reasoning. There has to be a healthy balance between people that allows for communication. If you are used to having a higher power looking over you making your decisions, that no longer is a two sided relationship but a one sided relationship. Kant says that “it is difficult for any individual man to work himself out to the immaturity that has all but become his nature” (Kant 1). That immaturity that man faces, is the familiarization one feels when having others think for himself. The ideal relationship between other humans should work equally

Categorical imperative, unlike maxim which seems to be individual, is the universal law that applied to all rational beings. Imperative, from the perspective of Kant, is an order that tells us what we must do or mustn’t. Categorical indicates that this imperative is used for all rational beings, regardless where they are.

Born in Germany in 1724, Immanuel Kant proposed the hypothesis that human action was governed by two fundamental truths, “the starry sky above and the natural law within.” Kant postulated that human behavior and virtue should be governed by reason and that the ethical law should derive from the concept of duty. Regardless of the outcomes of the decision, Kant believed that the value of a good act originated from the just moral principle that produced the action, rather than the consequences of said act; it is the motive behind an action that makes the action good. To simplify the abstraction, Kant proposed the concepts of both the Hypothetical Imperative and the Categorical Imperative as such, “a hypothetical imperative conditionally demands performance of an action for the sake of some other end or purpose; it has the form ‘Do A in order to achieve X’… A categorical imperative, on the other hand, unconditionally demands performance of an action for its own sake; it has the form ‘Do A.’" Simply put, Kant believed that doing what was right, regardless of the consequences, was what mattered

Through a series of analogies and examples, Kant carefully depicts the moral order when it comes to groundings for metaphysics of morals. He claims that there must a ultimate principle of morality, composed purely on abstraction, that could guide us to the right action in any situation that you may

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

In Critique of Practical Reason, Immanuel Kant gives an argument for the existence of God based on practical reason and the moral law. He argues that reason strives for the highest good, which is a connection between virtue and happiness (Kant 89). Practical reason runs into an issue when striving