...viewpoint by Aristotle, the Metaphysics of Morals by Immanuel Kant and the Utilitarianism Theory of morality view by John Stuart Mill are the three classical theories of morality. An individual’s acts did not define who they were morally, but the person’s life as a whole did according to Aristotle. Meaning, the things a person did over their lifetime would determine if they had morals or not. This was known as the Nicomachean Ethics viewpoint. In today’s society, this could relate to someone who was an overall moral citizen, but one day that changed for them and they did something horribly wrong. For example, a husband or a wife killing their spouse and the spouses lover because they were found cheating. Aristotle believed the action that was an abnormality should not be considered when considering whether the person was good or bad, but that their good works over their lifetime should be considered. Aristotle believed there were three types of life: one devoted to sensual pleasures, one seeking out political interests and the other being a life of thoughts (Arthur, J. and Scalet, S., 2014). With very different beliefs Immanuel Kant believed that if an action is wrong it will forever be wrong, and there is no justification for those specific actions. However, he does make note that most decisions are based on a sense of duty and people’s rights, and felt that those decisions took priority over a certain action. Kant had three basic concepts of morality, first, having a sense...
Words: 691 - Pages: 3
...Immanuel Kant, an influential theologian in the late 1700s, developed many theories relating to human nature and morality, most focusing on deontological, or absolute, ethics – ethics that focused on a moral act, rather than the consequences that followed it. Kant’s most important belief was that humans had many duties, one of the most important of those duties being not to lie. He then went on to say that, as it is our duty to always tell the truth, we should not falter on that, no matter what. Be believed that faltering in your duty was morally wrong, no matter what. He used an example of a murderer chasing their victim. If the victim had passed you and the murderer stopped to ask you where their victim had gone, you would be obliged to tell them the location of their victim – because then you would be doing your duty, even if harm were to come to the victim. Though an extreme example, Kant used this to explain the relationship between humans. He believed that if humans were to lie all the time, nothing anyone said would hold any value and no written documents would ever be a trustworthy source of information because no-one would be able to trust anyone else. This would ensure the fall of human beings, because a society built upon distrust would never thrive. So, to Kant, honesty was one of the most important parts of a human’s duty that could never be compromised in any situation for fear of destroying the human race. This absolute dedication to reliability of the truth...
Words: 504 - Pages: 3
...The Categorical Imperative Immanual Kant Kant argues that all imperatives are commanded either hypothetically or categorically. The hypothetical imperative says that an action is good only as a means to something else. Hypothetical imperatives tell us about which means will be best to achieve our ends; however, they do not tell us anything about the ends we should choose. The categorical imperative says one should act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. In other words, Kant is saying that the nature of a moral act is one which would be the right thing to do for any person in similar circumstances. An example Kant uses to explain this theory involves a man who finds himself in need of money and plans to borrow money but he knows that he will not be able to repay the lender. When we consider how it would be if his maxim became a universal law we see that it is contradicting. A law that says that anyone can promise something with the intention of not fulfilling it would make the promise and its end to be accomplished by it impossible. He goes on to explain that “things” have only a relative worth as means while on the other hand rational beings are designated “persons,” because they are ends themselves and may not be used merely as means. The practical imperative states that you act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only...
Words: 297 - Pages: 2
...distinction between a hypothetical imperative and a categorical imperative. Why does Kant think that all moral commands are categorical rather than hypothetical? What does it mean to act from a good will? Do you agree or disagree with Kant that only actions performed from a good will have moral value? Immanuel Kant Imperatives are commands in which Kant distinguishes between hypothetical and categorical imperatives. A hypothetical imperative is one that is relative. It takes the form of “If this, then that.” (333) This kind of imperative is not universal or absolute since they are conditioned on a relevant desire or greater achievement out of one’s self-interest. On the other hand, a categorical imperative deals with universalizability and strips away the emotions that bind a hypothetical imperative. Kant uses a formula in order to determine if an imperative is categorical. “Act as if the maxim of thy action were to become a universal law of nature.” (334) Kant suggests that if the command can be made a rule for all of mankind then it is categorical since this would make it universally binding. Kant thinks that all moral commands are categorical rather than hypothetical because only when one is motivated by morality can he have moral worth. This is because morality is not fixed in consequences that may arise, however, it is out of a person’s duty to fulfill that job regardless of their emotional state or desires, which defies a hypothetical imperative. To act from a good...
Words: 497 - Pages: 2
...Immanuel Kant thought of a structural way of how people should morally behave, the Categorical Imperative. Kant believed that moral rules are absolute and needed to be followed by and for everyone to maintain order. There are two formulations to this, hypothetical imperatives and categorical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives are things we should do in order to achieve our desires. If a person wanted to go to college, it is in their best interest to take the SAT. It is all hypothetical depending on your desire, but according to Kant, no matter what your desire is, you should help other people as part of his moral code. Moral requirements are considered categorical, the second formulation of Kant’s idea. The basics of categorical imperative is asking yourself, is the action I’m doing okay to become a universal law. With this principle, it limits everyone that follows it to be morally active. Kant provides a simple example, I ought to help someone that needs help because maybe I myself would need help and I would be grateful to receive the help. Kant’s universal rules include that lying should be strictly prohibited. If a lie was told, then according to the categorical imperative, lying would be done by everyone. A society full of liars would cause havoc and no one could trust each other, thus defeating the purpose of the categorical imperatives to keep everyone acting morally. A hypothetical was imposed, is lying to save someone’s life acceptable. Kant argued that...
Words: 1096 - Pages: 5
...order for us to make moral judgments upon our actions, Immanuel Kant provides a guideline for which actions are morally commendable in his text, “Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals”. He believes that an action is morally right when it is motivated by duty alone. Kant introduces the concept of rational beings, in which he defines it as beings with the capacity to act in accordance with the representations of laws or a will (4:412). According to Kant, we are considered to be imperfect rational beings, in which our rational capacities are influenced by various incentives, and therefore, we must be governed by a moral command that will tell us how to act accordingly with the law. In a broad sense, the law is equally valid for all rational beings, and ought to follow is what Kant refers to as the “moral law” (4:227). And the moral command can exist in two forms, either hypothetical or categorical, but only one of which is ideal for the purpose of the moral (4:412). Hypothetical imperative tells us to exercise our wills in respect of our desire for personal ends, and it follows a form: “if you want achieve a goal A, you ought to do B”. For instance, if you want to pass the chemistry exam, then you ought to study for it. Although hypothetical imperative can be universally valid, it cannot be a moral law because it only apply for those who are seeking for the similar ends. On the other hand, categorical imperative is a moral command on how you ought to act, independent of any...
Words: 1213 - Pages: 5
...Utilitarianism "According to act-utilitarianism, it is the value of the consequences of the particular act that counts when determining whether the act is right. Bentham's theory is act-utilitarian, and so is that of J.J.C. Smart. One objection to act-utilitarianism is that it seems to be too permissive, capable of justifying any crime, and even making it morally obligatory, if only the value of the particular consequences of the particular act is great enough. Another objection is that act-utilitarianism seems better in theory than in practice, since we hardly ever have the time and the knowledge to predict the consequences of an act, assess their value, and make comparisons with possible alternative acts. Modern act-utilitarians think that these objections can be met. Others have developed alternatives to act-utilitarianism, e.g. rule-utilitarianism, and other forms of indirect utilitarianism." The Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy ed. Thomas Mautner Ethical principle according to which an action is right if it tends to maximize happiness, not only that of the agent but also of everyone affected. Thus, utilitarians focus on the consequences of an act rather than on its intrinsic nature or the motives of the agent Classical utilitarianism is hedonist, but values other than, or in addition to, pleasure (ideal utilitarianism) can be employed, or — more neutrally, and in a version popular in economics — anything can be regarded as valuable that appears as an object of rational...
Words: 1521 - Pages: 7
...Nahim Jalal September 19, 2015 PHIL 305 Business Ethics - Munoz Imperatives. There is a lot when it comes to the differences of categorical and hypothetical imperatives. The best way to sum up a hypothetical imperative is that its a desired action that means to something else that a possibility will happen or willed. In page 64, Kant further explains further that hypothetical imperative is the imperative of nonmoral. A hypothetical imperative can help when you need to reach a goal. Some examples i can use from the book are on page 64: “If you wish to do well in school, study!” Not everybody attends school nor has to study, which is a hypothetical statement. An example I can use from a life event, I love football. I practiced hard, I was able to play well. The work you put in, you end up putting out the results. Again not everyone has to play football, but not everyone has to train to be good, some are just lucky. How ever moral law is not stated in hypothetical imperatives. Kant then explains that categorical imperative is the imperative of morality. Categorical imperative states formal actions and provides criteria that the three aspects of categorical imperative must have in order to be moral. A few examples can be, I read on page 64, “Thou shalt not kill”, which is a moral norm. You are not allowed to kill anyone because it is against the moral norm. One example I thought about, is if lying is always allowed and acceptable then there will never be a truth. That...
Words: 281 - Pages: 2
...‘Kantian theory’ Kantian theory founder is Emmanuel Kant who came up with the ‘Kantian theory’ which is also known as The Kant’s theory according to this theory, what a person should do and what a person wants to do are often not compatible. Doing what a person wants to do would usually bring immediate happiness or gratification, but might not benefit the person in the long run. On the other hand, doing what one must do may cause immediate discomfort or unhappiness, even if it is good for the person. This is the underlying message of Kantianism which is the purpose of morality is not to make you happy and the whole purpose of morality is to do the right thing just for the sake of doing it without any rewards. Kant also used the terms "will" and "motivation" interchangeably. Will means that we have the ability to choose good, based on reason. I like Kant's theory because Kant believes that if an action had moral intentions, it is therefore morally relevant no matter what the consequences are. This theory states that consequences of an action do not matter and have no moral relevance, thus only intentions are morally relevant (Class Notes)..The will, led by reason, forms two imperatives. Imperatives are basically the "should" in your life. Hypothetical imperatives are dependent upon the context of the situation. They are relative and contingent. Hypothetical imperatives are formed to bring about a certain result or consequence, and have nothing to do with morality. "Since we are...
Words: 582 - Pages: 3
...Chong Bland (Linda) Ken Maddox Business Ethics 4/09/2011 Week # 3 Drop box assignment Immanuel Kant and his contribution to the study of business ethics Immanuel Kant focuses mainly on the role of duty. He believes that actions can be in accord with duty or be from duty. Duty is defined as an action which we are obligated to perform out of respect for the moral law. Moral law is practical reason, which is in every rational person, though some people are more aware of it than others. Moral law is having the knowledge of the difference between good and evil, and an inner conviction that we should do what is good. The concept of duty includes good will. Good will is good without qualification; it is good in itself and good through willing alone. It comes from an instinct within us and cannot be denied. Good will can be seen in moderation, self-control and sober reflection. There are things in everyday life that have to do with duty. We are innately born with the capacity to learn right from wrong. Every single human being is molded by their parents, teachers, and anyone else who is a part of their life, from there on is how we determine what is good and what is evil. It is my duty to preserve my life. This idea works because there are many people there are many people who hate their lives and yet they will still keep their life dear to them. These people are not doing it for self satisfaction; it is just their duty to live on. A man...
Words: 1263 - Pages: 6
..."morality" has complete power over our beings. Morality is the quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct. The installation of a moral system is vital in every society. Yet, every moral system must deal with the major conflicting general moral issues: Consequentialism versus Non-consequentialism; Self versus Other-Interestedness; Act Utilitarianism versus Rule Utilitarianism; and Emotion versus reason as well as others. The approaches that are used to deal with these issues are up to the person which dilemma or situation is best fitted. In order to use one of these methods you have to understand these theories and their purposes. Immanuel Kant was a dominant philosopher of his time (1724-1804), the theory of Kant is the most difficult to understand but when understood is a simple approach. Kant argues that “the moral worth of an action is to be judged not by its consequences but by the nature of the maxim or principal that motivated the action”(Cahn pg. 98). The only actions that are correct are the ones that can serve as universal laws. People should act only on principles or maxims that can be universalized without contradiction. Another theory that is the theory of a leading English philosopher known as John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), his theory differentiates between Kant’s in that his concentrates on the consequences of an action rather than the motive for an action. Mill’s theory is known as utilitarianism, this view is grounded off that principle that...
Words: 1861 - Pages: 8
...Der Mensch tickt nicht nur rational. Die Politik nutzt das aus, indem sie an unser Gewissen und an unsere Instinkte appelliert. Das soll der Gesellschaft nutzen – doch der Einzelne weiß davon nur wenig. Ist Ihre Liste mit guten Vorsätzen für 2013 schon fertig? Hier noch ein paar Vorschläge. Wie wäre es mal mit was Solidem, sich einen Organspendeausweis zuzulegen zum Beispiel? Oder: Endlich einen Riester-Vertrag abschließen. Die Klassiker gehen natürlich immer: Mehr Sport. Weniger Fett und Süßes. Aufhören mit dem Rauchen. Ambitionierte nehmen gleich das ganze Menü: Ein besserer Mensch werden. Doch ganz egal, welche Vorsätze es auf die Liste schaffen, die Wahrscheinlichkeit ist groß, dass sie Ende 2013 weitgehend unbearbeitet sind. Das liegt daran, dass der Mensch ein kurzsichtiges Wesen ist. Menschen ziehen die Belohnung jetzt der Belohnung morgen vor, egal, wie ungleich kleiner die Sofortbereicherung ist. Deswegen essen wir zu viel Schokolade und sparen nicht für das Alter. Das über die Zeit angenaschte Übergewicht und die drohende Altersarmut können die meisten dank ihrer hervorragenden Verdrängungskünste ausblenden. „Akrasia“, Willensschwäche, nannte Aristoteles das, ein Charakterfehler, der nicht nur dem Einzelnen, sondern auch der Gemeinschaft erhebliche Kosten verursacht. Zu viel Schokolade heute, teure Reha-Aufenthalte morgen. Zu wenig gespart fürs Alter, ein Rentenzuschuss morgen. Akrasia ist ein volkswirtschaftliches und damit ein politisches Problem. Deshalb hat...
Words: 390 - Pages: 2
...Title: Stereotyping By: Sheila Cowan PHI 103: Informal Logic Instructor: Issac Brown Date: November 07, 2011 Stereotyping, prejudices and discrimination are ways in which society maintains class and status distinctions and disparate rights and resource distribution. Whether stereotypes are personal, socially based or institutionally legitimized, stereotyping uses flawed logic. It universally applies a belief, idea or an observation to a group of people with a specific trait or characteristic. This leads to invalid logic arguments, hypothetical imperatives and categorical imperatives that look something like this (Brown, 2001): • If a person has brown hair they are always less intelligent. When constructed as a universal or categorical imperative it looks like this (Brown, 2001): • People with brown hair are always less intelligent. Nevertheless stereotypes persist. Stereotyping and Discrimination Wherever people must compete for resources or position, stereotyping becomes a powerful tool. Governments and organizational leaders charged with the distribution of these positions and resources often use stereotyping and discrimination as a process of elimination. Therefore, negative stereotyping exists in almost every sphere of participation. It exists in schools, in financial institutions, in nearly every industrial and societal sector. Sometimes, negative stereotyping is less obvious than others are. As demonstrated...
Words: 938 - Pages: 4
...Name: Hoang Nguyen Period: 2+3 Date: 05/18/18 Immanuel Kant’s Philosophy ~~~Moral is reason~~~ The main claim of Immanuel Kant is that morality come from reasoning (crash course). A thing is moral because it a right thing to do - the existence of itself is already consider good - , not because it has a good consequence. As an alternative way to put this, if a thing is acknowledged as rationally good, it is moral. So how do we know it is rationally good like Kant said? I will discuss about it later on. But first, you have to know why we must live according to that moral law. Can’t we do the bad thing if we want? Agreeing with Kant’s argument, we can’t, it is our duty to fulfil it. He reasoned all living thing ( except human ) always act...
Words: 1047 - Pages: 5
...18th century German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) presents a criterion of moral obligation, which he calls the categorical imperative. Kant rejects these traditional theories of morality and argues instead that moral actions are based on a "supreme principle of morality" which is objective, rational, and freely chosen: the categorical imperative. Kant’s clearest account of the categorical imperative is in the Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals. Kant argues against traditional criteria of morality, and explains why the categorical imperative can be the only possible standard of moral obligation. He begins with a general account of willful decisions. The function of the human will is to select one course of action from among several possible courses of action (for example, my choice to watch television right now instead of going jogging). Our specific willful decisions are influenced by several factors, such as laziness, immediate emotional gratification, or what is best in the end. Kant argues that in moral matters the will is ideally influenced only by rational considerations, and not by subjective considerations such as one’s emotions. This is because morality involves what is necessary for us to do (e.g., you must be benevolent), and only rational considerations can produce necessity. The rational consideration, which influences the will, must be a single principle of obligation, for only principles can be purely rational considerations...
Words: 1163 - Pages: 5
