...for our society than Immanuel Kant’s principle that it is better to do what's morally just. I will explain why Mill’s theory served as a better guide to moral behavior and differentiate between the rights and responsibilities of human beings to themselves and society. Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are philosophers who addressed the issues of morality in terms of how moral customs are formed. Immanuel Kant presented one perspective in The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals that is founded on his belief that the worth of man is inherent in his skill to reason. John Stuart Mill holds another belief as presented in the book, Utilitarianism, which is seemingly conflicting with the thoughts of Kant. What is most unique about the ethics of morality is the idea of responsibilities to particular individuals. According to both Mill and Kant, moral obligations are not fundamentally particularistic because they are rooted in universal moral principles. Both philosophers have made great impacts in their niche areas in the field. An analysis of their theories may help develop a better understanding of them and their theories. Mill holds an empiricist theory while Kant holds a rationalist theory. Kant explains morality through forms that he believes are essential to free and sensible judgment. Mill’s utilitarian approach is a form of consequential theory because the rightness or wrongness of an act is determined by the outcomes. Kant’s ethics of duty is the foundation...
Words: 2175 - Pages: 9
...3.2 God in the Critique of Pure Reason's Transcendental Dialectic 3.2.1 The Ens Realissimum The Transcendental Dialectic's “Ideal of Reason” contains the best known and most frequently anthologized components of Kant's philosophy of religion. In addition to its portrayal of the ens realissimum, one finds within it Kant's objections to the Ontological, Cosmological and Physico-theological (Design) arguments for God's existence. It is thus the text most central to the negative elements of Kant's philosophy of religion and is integral to the widely held view that Kant is deeply hostile to faith. The general aim of the Transcendental Dialectic is to expose reason's excesses, its drive to move beyond the limits of possible experience, and to bring all concepts into a systematic unity under an “unconditioned condition.” The Transcendental Dialectic begins with a critique of reason's illusions and errors within the sphere of Rational Psychology. It then moves on to a critique of cosmological metaphysics, and then to the “Ideal of Reason” where Kant turns to Rational Theology and its pursuit of religious knowledge. As Kant explains, underlying all the traditional proofs for God's existence is the concept of the ens realissimum, the most real being. Reason comes to the idea of this being through the principle that every individuated object is subject to the “principle of complete determination.” While the generality of concepts allow them to be less than fully determined (e.g...
Words: 13468 - Pages: 54
...Kant’s moral argument focuses on the notion that God must exist to provide structure to the moral universe. Technically he did not believe that is was possible to prove the existence of God through rational or empirical means. It is important to outline two key ideas before explaining the details of the moral argument. These ideas centre around his assumptions of the universe: that the universe was fair; and that the world around us is fundamentally rational. He begins with the unspoken assumption that the world is fair, owing to the dominance of the enlightenment belief that the universe was fundamentally knowable through reason. It is important to note that Kant began a new way of looking at knowledge. He believed that we could know the world through reason in a prior synthetic way. This was a complete change from how the world had been view previously and was known as Kant’s Copernican revolution. In essence Kant believed in two separate worlds of knowledge: noumenal and the phenomenal worlds. The noumenal world is the world as it truly is without being observed. It is fundamentally unknowable because the act of observation changes the very thing that we observe. It is as though human beings have a specific set of spectacles that cannot be taken off and like the proverbial rose tinted ones they change our perception of the world around us. This personalised view of the universe is the phenomenal world. However, what is key to explaining Kant’s moral argument is the fact that...
Words: 2616 - Pages: 11
...Philosophy Open access to the SEP is made possible by a world-wide funding initiative. Please Read How You Can Help Keep the Encyclopedia Free Author & Citation Info | Friends PDF Preview | InPho Search | PhilPapers Bibliography Kant and Hume on Morality First published Wed Mar 26, 2008; substantive revision Sun Aug 12, 2012 The ethics of Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) is often contrasted with that of David Hume (1711–1776). Hume's method of moral philosophy is experimental and empirical; Kant emphasizes the necessity of grounding morality in a priori principles. Hume says that reason is properly a “slave to the passions,” while Kant bases morality in his conception of a reason that is practical in itself. Hume identifies such feelings as benevolence and generosity as proper moral motivations; Kant sees the motive of duty—a motive that Hume usually views as a second best or fall back motive—as uniquely expressing an agent's commitment to morality and thus as conveying a special moral worth to actions. Although there are many points at which Kant's and Hume's ethics stand in opposition to each other, there are also important connections between the two. Kant shared some important assumptions about morality and motivation with Hume, and had, early in his career, been attracted to and influenced by the sentimentalism of Hume and other British moralists. The aim of this essay is not to compare Hume and Kant on all matters ethical. Instead, we examine...
Words: 24372 - Pages: 98
...trying to achieve. Good papers make use of at least two philosophers we have read, and use direct “quotes” from them. Any quotations and paraphrasing must be cited properly, with quotation marks and parenthetical references. You are not required to use outside sources, but you are encouraged to do so. If you choose to, you must cite them carefully. This includes internet resources – give me the url and all the information you can, and use direct quotes. Before you use an online resource, check to make sure that it is scholarly. For example, Wikipedia is not scholarly, while the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is scholarly. Look for quality sources. Introduce your topic/question in the introductory paragraph, and explain your methodology (i.e., say whose writings you will discuss, who you will agree and disagree with, and state briefly your own position in the introductory paragraph). You should use first person sentence structure (“I will argue that...” “I will disagree...
Words: 2231 - Pages: 9
...THE MORAL ARGUMENT KANT’S MORAL ARGUMENT - Immanuel Kant analysed Aquinas’ 4th way and devised his proof for God based on morality INNATE MORAL AWARENESS - Kant’s starting point was that we all have a sense of innate moral awareness: ‘Two things fill the mind with ever new increasing admiration and awe… the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me’ His argument for the existence of God follows: 1. We all have a sense of innate moral awareness – from this we are under obligation to be virtuous 2. An ‘average’ level of virtue is not enough, we are obliged to aim for the highest standard possible 3. True virtue should be rewarded with happiness 4. There is an ideal state where human virtue and happiness are united – this Kant called the ‘Summum Bonum’ 5. Moral statements are prescriptive – ‘ought’ implies ‘can’ 6. Humans can achieve virtue in a lifetime but it is beyond us to ensure we are rewarded with happiness 7. Therefore there must be a God who has power to ensure that virtue and happiness coincide Kant’s moral argument does not postulate that God is necessary for morality but that God is required for morality to achieve its end ‘Therefore it is morally necessary to assume the existence of God.’ CARDINAL NEWMAN “We feel responsibility, are ashamed, are frightened at transgressing the voice of conscience, this implies that there is one to whom we are responsible.” For Newman, the existence of conscience implies a moral law-giver whom we are answerable...
Words: 803 - Pages: 4
...was of the sensible reality, that which can be sensed, led to admitting that there is no reality outside of what can be sensed. As such, there could be no immortality of the soul or of the freedom of will; both being unable to be proved through the senses. This proved to have great implications with what is taught through religion, as there is a supersensible reality in religion. Although both rationalists and empiricists were both trying to provide answers to the same epistemological question, what knowledge is and how it is acquired, they had very different perspectives upon the matter. Kant was an avid scholar, who without question was adept at many different fields of study. Having these different perspectives in hand influenced Kant’s work of a Critique of Pure Reason. This work holds that there...
Words: 903 - Pages: 4
...AS Philosophy & Ethics Course Handbook 2013 to 2014 [pic] OCR AS Level Religious Studies (H172) http://www.ocr.org.uk/qualifications/type/gce/hss/rs/index.aspx OCR AS Level Religious Studies (H172) You are studying Philosophy of Religion and Religious Ethics and will be awarded an OCR AS Level in Religious Studies. The modules and their weightings are: |AS: |Unit Code |Unit Title |% of AS |(% of A Level) | | |G571 |AS Philosophy of Religion |50% |(25%) | | |G572 |AS Religious Ethics |50% |(25%) | If you decide to study for the full A Level you will have to study the following modules at A2: |A2: |Unit Code |Unit Title |(% of A Level) | | |G581 |A2 Philosophy of Religion |(25%) | | |G582 |A2 Religious Ethics |(25%) | Grading | ...
Words: 13036 - Pages: 53
...The standard that should be used to judge the moral worth of certain actions has remained debated and controversial over time. Though it is hard to apply in real life, I personally believe that the moral worth of an action should be determined by the motivation and intention that initiated it, but not by the consequences or influences that the action brings about. I will illustrate my reasoning by focusing on Kant’s views on good will and moral worth, along with some real life examples, Socrates’s discussion on differences between mere true belief and real knowledge of virtue and several other philosophers’ unique interpretations and related discussions on this topic. Kant makes a clear argument about good will in the very beginning of his book Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals. He explicitly states that: “There is no possibility of thinking anything at all in the world, or even out of it, which can be regarded as good without qualification, except a good will. (Kant 7)” Kant believes that a good will is always morally good. Therefore, what a good will does is always morally good as well. Also, he obviously takes good will as the only true standard to judge the moral worth of a certain action. He explains that everything that seems to be good by itself actually could only be good if they are driven by a good will; without a good will, these other things might be used to produce negative outcomes. Except for a good will, nothing else would be good simply on its own...
Words: 2916 - Pages: 12
...Study Guide: Lesson 18 Arguments for the Existence of God Lesson Overview: In this lesson, we arrive at 1 of the most important questions of the course for Christians: Do we have good reasons to believe that God exists? Today, many are claiming that there is no evidence for God’s existence and those who believe in God are just deluding themselves. However, this lesson will show that some very interesting arguments have been developed throughout the history of philosophy that demonstrate that the theist is within his epistemic rights in believing in God. While the case is not 100% certain (few things are in philosophy), it is certainly reasonable in the absence of any contrary evidence to hold that God exists as the best explanation for certain effects we observe in creation. Tasks: View and take notes of the presentation: “Arguments for God’s Existence.” Read “The Absurdity of Life without God” by William Lane Craig. This reading by Christian philosopher William Lane Craig is titled the “The Absurdity of Life without God.” In this powerful argument, Craig seriously considers the ramifications for us if in fact there really is no God. I assign it to my students on campus and they always tell me it is their favorite reading of the semester. I think you will really enjoy it. It is not a difficult reading and is very powerful on a personal level. While it does not prove God's existence, it does add positive epistemic evidence for the cumulative case for God as...
Words: 704 - Pages: 3
...‘the good’, ‘duty’, and ‘moral worth’, will yield the supreme principle of morality, namely, the categorical imperative. Kant’s discussion in section one can be roughly divided into four parts: (1) The good will (2) The teleological argument. (3) The three propositions regarding duty and (4) The categorical imperative. The Good Will Kant thinks that, with the exception of the good will, all goods are qualified. By qualified, Kant means that those goods are good insofar as they presuppose or derive their goodness from something else. Take wealth as an example. Wealth can be extremely good if it is used for human welfare, but it can be disastrous if a corrupt mind is behind it. In a similar vein, we often desire intelligence and take it to be good, but we certainly would not take the intelligence of an evil genius to be good. The good will, by contrast, is good in itself. Kant writes, “A good will is not good because of what it effects or accomplishes, because of its fitness to attain some proposed end, but only because its volition, that is, it is good initself . . . .” (4:394) The precise nature of the good will is subject to scholarly debate. The Teleological Argument Kant believes that a teleological argument may be given to demonstrate that the “true vocation of reason must be to produce a will that is good.” (4:396) As with other teleological arguments, such as the case with teleological arguments for the existence of God, Kant’s teleological argument is motivated by an appeal...
Words: 4313 - Pages: 18
...That is, our feelings of nature are properly designed and therefore ought to be heeded. Kant’s belief of ethics might be seen as an over-arching design and order of nature. The third illustration considers the issue of developing one’s talents. Nature endows us with aptitudes that are intended for a given purpose, which Kant implies, are valid in an appropriate system of nature. Like the antecedent moralists, Kant appeals to the teleology of nature. Initially, in the first section of Groundwork Kant seems to echo Aristotle, but then takes great care to refute Aristotle’s expositions of virtues. As Kant moves to a discussion of the second and fourth illustrations which concern duties to others, his analogy with nature prevails. Kant draws again...
Words: 5485 - Pages: 22
...Ethics Give an account of Kant’s ethical theory [25] Immanuel Kant was a philosopher who was born in the 16th century. The essence of his ethics is that all human beings are striving for goodness and that the use of power of reason solves any moral dilemma. This is known as the ‘summon bonum’. He developed his own ethical theory based around the idea of moral law. He was looking for some sort of objective basis for morality as a hole, a clear and scientific way. Kant believed that we could use reason to work out a consistent, non-overridable set of moral principles. Immanuel’s ethical theory is deontological, so it is based on the idea that an act’s claim to being right or wrong is independent of the consequences of that action. His theory uses practical reason to look at the argument before deciding what to do about the situation. His ethical statements are described as a priori synthetic, this means that a statement is knowable before sense experience, but requires sense experience for final verification but it may be true or false. His theory basically explains that all humans must do their duty, without the need for experience. Kant believed in right or wrong based on reason, he relies on intuitions or facts. For Kant, practical reason looks at the evidence and the argument, he says it cannot depend on external factors. For his own ethical theory, only good will counts. Good will is at the very centre of ethics, the person is a free moral agent and not one that had...
Words: 732 - Pages: 3
...In both Immanuel Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism, the authors give several strong, well structured arguments on the composition of ethics. Largely, their works help to draw focus to two different explanations of what makes an action morally just as opposed to morally unjust through essentially opposite viewpoints. Despite a key difference between their philosophies, Kant and Mill contribute to an overall picture of the historical ethical argument. Chronologically, the first major philosopher, Immanuel Kant, presents an argument that is based upon solely “a priori” knowledge, or rather knowledge that does not come from experience. Kant explains that because we are all rational beings, we are able to separate ourselves from our current human condition and use our own ability to reason to see a broad picture of what is morally acceptable to others. Similarly, Kant finds that the only thing which is good without limitation is a good will; that is, it is the intention of an action that determines the moral validity of any claim, not the effects both foreseen and actual. Kant connects this idea of morality to the claim that humans should act out of duty instead of just what is according to duty. The difference between these two ideas, Kant argues, is that “according to duty” is acting in the right way only because of the negative consequences associated with not performing a morally correct action whereas “from duty” refers to the...
Words: 1983 - Pages: 8
...2, 2011 The Argument for Consequentialism Consequentialism and Imannuel Kant’s Theory of Moral Value provide a good framework for deciding what right actions are and specifically what actions are deemed intrinsically valuable. Consequentialism is going to emphasis that actions maximizing intrinsic value of all people affected by a situation are morally right while Kant is going to stress that only the motive behind an action determines whether an action is right, regardless of the consequences. Although consequentialism attributes the rightness of an action only on a consequence, consequentialist theories are broader theories of right action because they consider both motives and consequences in making moral decision, whereas Kant’s theory does not. Consequentialist theories of right action have two components. The first component states that a consequentialist theory will always answer what is intrinsically valuable. An object or thing that has intrinsic value is something that has value for its own sake. For example, pleasure and the feeling of happiness are intrinsically valuable because they are good in and of itself. The specific thing that is deemed intrinsically valuable can change according to what consequentialist theory one accepts. For example, utilitarians find the welfare of sentient beings intrinsically valuable while a hedonist finds only pleasure intrinsically valuable. The second component of consequentialist theories explains a principle of...
Words: 1765 - Pages: 8
