Queen V Dudley and Stephens

The book, “Just Mercy” by Bryan Stevenson pleas to fix the current unfair and fragmented system of criminal justice and juvenile justice. The book’s plot focuses majority on Stevenson’s work and his clients. The main narrative tackles the story of Walter McMillan, who was accused of killing a white woman, but despite hard evidence that would prove he’s innocent, is disregarded by the court due to his race. The main issue was not even the lack of care for racial equality in this case, but the fact that he was placed on death row before his case went to trial. This is one of many unjust cases that have happened in the past and that are currently happening in the system revolving around the death penalty. The remaining excerpts from the book

In this paper, I will argue Kant’s categorical imperative's through a condensed summation of his Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals with specific regard for the need for categorical imperative and how it's flaws can disband the efficacy of his claim.

Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative is a theory that basically relays the same message that most mothers teach their kids, and that is to do the right thing. The categorical imperative could be easily explained by the Golden Rule about treating others as you would like to be treated. Kant dives a little deep with his theory, however, and breaks the categorical imperative into three formulations. The first formulation is about essentially removing yourself from a situation and doing what is best for everyone. Kant is basically saying that it is unethical to make decisions that affect everyone, but only benefits you. The second formulation is about making sure that

The final pillar of Kantian ethics is the categorical imperative. This is a test for the maxim in order to understand if the maxim can be defined as universal law. The categorical imperative is vital to Kantian ethics since Kant believes any act is essentially wrong if it cannot be considered universal law.

in so far as it is obligatory for a will, is called a command (of reason), and

No man shall kill another, and not suffer. Dudley and Stephens willingly chose to kill Parker, and they should have to pay the price for taking an innocent life. God is the only one that has judgment over another man, and by killing him innocently, they acted as a god. If they believed in God, as it says in John 3:18, then they would not have been condemned to commit such a sin.

Immanuel Kant explains different concepts in Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals; one includes “The Categorical Imperative” that I agree with. Kant states “I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (Kant, 113), which describes Categorical Imperative. The reason a person acts should be based on reason and if it were something they wanted to become universalized or not.

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.

     Kant describes the categorical imperative as “expressed by an ought and thereby indicate the relation of an objective law of reason to a will that is not necessarily determined by this law because of its subjective constitution.” In other words, a categorical impetrative is a command of morality that applies everywhere at all times no matter what, without exception. Kant describes two forms of imperatives, hypothetical and categorical.

In the late 18th century, German philosopher Emmanuel Kant wrote a book titled Groundwork of Metaphysics of Morals. Kant describes the common principles of morality are naturally apply in life. Arguing that rational people act based on moral for the good will of the rational whole. Kant believes that to act morally, there has to be a reason behind it. People that are rational have the capacity to act on free will, based on universal and necessary laws. Kant explains two laws of imperative; Hypothetical and Categorical Imperatives. Both imperatives simplified thing that people have to do in society. The hypothetical imperative means to want something and finding different ways to achieve it. An example would be wanting to pass an exam to get

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

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’s theory of the categorical imperative contrasts greatly to the principle of utilitarianism. Kant’s categorical imperative states you are intended to act a certain way because it is your duty to do so. Kant principle also states, to correctly do ones duty, one must make decisions while excluding the influences of the actions’ effects, and our own inclinations, therefore, one must think in a deontological thinker, to a certain extent. Kant also states in order to make a moral decision, one must have a choice, and so, if one cannot make a choice, and then they do not need to make a morally correct decision. Kant’s theory is fair and treats all individuals equally, promoting an equal society, as no one person can be valued above the rest.

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

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