...Categorical Imperative 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 maxim of doing the right thing because it is right thing to do. The moral worth of an action is determined by whether or not it was acted upon out of respect for the moral law, or the Categorical Imperative. Imperatives in general imply something we ought to do however there is a distinction between categorical imperatives and hypothetical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives are obligatory so long as we desire X. If we desire X we ought to do Y. However, categorical imperatives are not subject to conditions. The Categorical Imperative is universally binding to all rational creatures because they are rational. Kant proposes three formulations the Categorical Imperative in his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Moral, the Universal Law formulation, Humanity...
Words: 1540 - Pages: 7
...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
...The Categorical Imperative Analyzing Immanuel Kant’s Grounding for A Metaphysics of Morals Anders Bordum WP 4/2002 January 2002 MPP Working Paper No. 4/2002 © January 2002 ISBN: 87-91181-06-2 ISSN: 1396-2817 Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy Copenhagen Business School Blaagaardsgade 23B DK-2200 Copenhagen N Denmark Phone: +45 38 15 36 30 Fax: +45 38 15 36 35 E-mail: as.lpf@cbs.dk www.cbs.dk/departments/mpp 2 The Categorical Imperative Analyzing Immanuel Kant's Grounding for a Metaphysics of Morals By Anders Bordum Keywords: Categorical imperative, discourse ethics, duty, ethics, monologic, dialogic, Immanuel Kant, Jürgen Habermas, self-legislation, self-reference. 3 Abstract In this article I first argue that Immanuel Kant’s conception of the categorical imperative is important to his philosophy. I systematically, though indirectly, interconnect the cognitive and moral aspects of his thinking. Second, I present an interpretation of the Kantian ethics, taking as my point of departure, the concept of the categorical imperative. Finally, I show how the categorical imperative is given a dialogical interpretation by Jürgen Habermas in his approach, usually referred to as discourse ethics. I argue that the dialogical approach taken by discourse ethics is more justifiable and therefore more usefuli. I The Synthesis of Rationalism and Empiricism The philosophy of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is in the main inspired...
Words: 10855 - Pages: 44
...If, by trying to will what he has objective ground to will, he thereby frustrates the very thing he has objective ground to will, then it is not possible to will the principle of self-love to be universal law.19 If Wood is correct in his interpretation of Kant, then he seems to have provided a successful counterexample to Kant’s argument for FUL.20 19This example assumes that the principle of self-love is an objective principle on the basis of the objectivity of the end of happiness. However, it seems possible that the (hypothetical) objectivity of the end of happiness is better captured by some other practical principle. Perhaps there is another principle that is grounded in the end of happiness that actually could be willed to be universal law. Wood does not consider this possibility, but it seems relevant to the example. 20It is somewhat unclear whether Wood intends the violation of the categorical imperative to be a contradiction in the will of the egoist, or whether the result is a contradiction in conception/nature. The case’s striking resemblance to Kant’s example of the impermissibility of false promising suggests that it is a contradiction in conception/nature. However, Wood’s own discussion, while not taking a clear...
Words: 1150 - 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
...rationalize our decisions based on our duty to do what is right. This assignment will also discuss how Kantianism represents my personal principles. Kantianism provides moral laws that provide a sense of equality for all people. There are also several arguments that are against Kantianism and will dispute the theory. But the overall goal of Kantianism is to ensure that every person is treated with respect. In addition, this assignment will discuss and defend my position on a contemporary IT issue using a practical ethical theory. Unit 1 Assignment 1 Ethical Theory-Kantian The ethical theory that I have chosen that best represents my personal principles is Kantianism. This theory was named after the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. According to Quinn, “Kant believed that people’s actions ought to be guided by moral laws, and that these moral laws were universal” (Quinn, 2013, para. 2). The universal law is the belief that everyone tries to do the right thing and be a rational person and therefore rational decisions can be applied to everyone in the world. Kantianism does not consider the consequences of the ethical issues to be important, rather it is based on what should be done or doing the right thing regardless of the consequences. Kant’s decision is based on the theory that nothing is good without qualification. This means that the only thing that is good is good will or good intentions. The belief is that if a person does a good deed without expecting to gain something or...
Words: 1571 - Pages: 7
...Immanuel Kant A Famous Philosopher 10/21/2012 Kelley Huttar Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804): Immanuel Kant was a modern day German deontologist from Prussia and became one of history’s most famous Philosophers. A deontologist is someone who believes in acts that are strictly right or wrong. Kant was an influential thinker and one of the last philosophers of the Enlightenment era. However his work in epistemology (the study of knowledge) and theology (the study of religion) are still influential to current philosophers of our time. He was also known for his beliefs in ethics and his knowledge in astronomy. Kant was an independent person, meaning he did not let others influence his way of thought. He created his own moral values and acted alone in his findings and did not look for outside criticism. He believed that other people’s emotions and view towards a subject could impact one’s moral values and behavior. He was admired by his friends for this quality, and because of this he became famous for the concept known as the categorical imperative (Evers). Theory Developed and Its Example: Categorical Imperative: Kant developed a theory on morality that is known as the categorical imperative. This theory implies that one should only act on his or her own morals. Kant believed a person has a duty to be moral in every sense as he believed this was a moral requirement. He also believed that an action one takes must be moral enough for the entire universe to agree...
Words: 2227 - Pages: 9
...Immanuel Kant adheres to Deontological ethics. His theory offers a view of morality based on the principle of good will and duty. According to him, people can perform good actions solely by good intentions without any considerations to consequences. In addition, one must follow the laws and the categorical imperative in order to act in accordance with and from duty. Several other philosophers such as Hannah Arendt discuss Kant’s moral philosophy. In her case study: “The Accused and Duties of a Law-Abiding Citizen”, Arendt examines how Adolf Eichmann’s actions conformed to Kant’s moral precepts but also how they ran of afoul to his conception of duty. In contrast, John Stuart Mill adopts a teleological view of moral philosophy. He exposes his view of consequentialism and utilitarianism to argue that an action is morally right only to the extent that it maximizes the aggregate happiness of all parties involved regardless of the motive. In the present paper, I will expose Kant’s moral precepts and the importance of duty in his Deontological principles. Then, I will evaluate Arendt’s report on Adolf Eichmann to analyze the ways in which his actions were in accordance to or against Kant’s moral philosophy. I will conclude my discussion with an evaluation of Mill’s approach to morality in order to examine the differences between his teleological philosophy and Kant’s ethical principles. Kant’s moral philosophy is based on the categorical imperative (CI), good will, and duty. According...
Words: 2811 - Pages: 12
...Kant introduced the idea of deontological ethics. Deontology views morality based on its accordance to duties, accepted norms, and motives. From a deontological perspective, something is moral acceptable if you can justify your actions with a legitimate purpose or a principle of responsibility. Kant created what is known as the categorical imperative, which is known as his famous statement to these duties of deontology. Kant’s categorical imperative uses two principle formulations. These formulations are universal law and the formula of the end itself. The formula of universal law is the staple of Kant’s ethical theory. This is because this law is the method for determining morality of actions. The philosophy of deontology states that in order to determine if something is morally correct, we must first rule out every consequence caused by the current action. This is because, in deontology consequences are irrelevant, as deontology mainly focuses on the motives of ones actions. This is because Kant believes that good will is the only matter of moral significance. The outcome is of no consequence and isn’t even considered an option when evaluating a situation. Things such as courage, knowledge and power can become bad if they are used with wrongful intentions. Topics that Kant discusses are lying and promise keeping. He believes that it is acceptable to not keep a promise, only if the promise was made with the intention and expectation of keeping it. As for lying, the categorical...
Words: 323 - 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
...Utilitarianism PRINCIPLE OF UTILITY Utility was defined by Bentham as “the principle which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever according to the tendency which it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question.” The principle of utility is designed to promote the happiness of the individual or the community. The community can have no interests independent of or aggressive to the interests of the individual. Bentham's theory of utilitarianism asserts that actions and institutions should be judged by their contribution to utility, which is measured by calculating the relative contribution to happiness or pleasure, as opposed to pain. It has been pointed out that not only is pleasure difficult to measure, but that utilitarianism provides neither any guarantee of individual rights against majority interests, nor any means of weighing high levels of pleasure for a few against lower levels of pleasure for greater numbers. http://www.utilitarian.org/faq.html What is the utilitarian position on monogamy vs. polygamy, marriage and adultery, capitalism vs. socialism, the legalisation of cannabis etc? It is a common mistake to suppose that utilitarians have a fixed approach to controversial political issues. While utilitarians agree on what the criteria for good social policy are (being its conformability to utility), we freely and commonly disagree on which policies are actually useful. We know which goals we...
Words: 2060 - Pages: 9
...Section One In section one, Kant argues from common sense morality to the supreme principle of morality, which he calls the categorical imperative. Kant thinks that uncontroversial premises from our shared common sense morality, and analysis of common sense concepts such as ‘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...
Words: 4313 - Pages: 18
...Explain how the various formulations of the Categorical Imperatives might be applied to an ethical issue? [25] Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is best known for his ‘Copernican Revolution’ in the theory of knowledge. He argued that space, time and causality were features of the way our minds organise experience, rather than features of the external world. Kant’s ethical theory was deontological and absolute. We use reason for morality acceptance. His categorical imperatives are part of Kant’s ethical theory, they require the sense of reason (which he believed that a human possess). He believed that if you combined ones duty with goodwill it will result in a moral act. Mixed emotions will not do in a moral situation, you need to exclude all possible emotions to make a perfect moral action. This will then result to summum bonum (an afterlife with God). However, to work out what your duty is, is an ethical dilemma. We can link Kant’s Categorical Imperatives (CI) to euthanasia. Euthanasia is terminating a patients life, painlessly, who is suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. Terminating someone's life can be voluntary (someone helps a person die) or involuntary ( where a patient is capable of ending their own life). Euthanasia can also be passive (food and water deprivation) or active (injected a patient with a medicine which will painlessly kill them). There are many churches and religions which will deny this mercy killing. Natural law followers...
Words: 923 - Pages: 4
...What does Kant mean by the “categorical imperative? Kants claims that an action is right if it conforms to a moral rule. The rules that we consider right or wrong is what Kant calls categorical imperative. (an imperative that Kant expresses as requiring that a person must never perform an act unless he or she can consistently determine that the maxim or rule that motivated the action could become a universal law. If there is deemed to be a universal law that any human being can interpret then this would constitute a categorical or exceptionless imperative. Kant also discussed a second formulation of categorical imperative which is just as important as the first formation. This would be to treat people as ends in themselves and never merely as means. An example of this is to acknowledge teachers, parents, and educators rather than assuming that their services are expected. For Kant, the morally important thing is not consequences but the way choosers think when they make choices. Kant says that only one kind of thing is inherently good, and that is the good will. What makes the will good? The will is good when it acts out of duty, not out of inclination. What does it mean to act out of inclination? To do something because it makes you feel good or because you hope to gain something from it. What does it mean to act out of duty? Kant says this means that we should act from respect for the moral law. How do we do that? We must know what the moral law is. How...
Words: 436 - Pages: 2
...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
