In his book titled Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant provides a clear moral philosophy based on moral obligation as a fundamental value that all human beings should have. He proposes that an action must be performed from duty instead of with accordance to duty in order to have moral worth. Kant tries to prove that “the moral worth depends…not on the realization of the object of the action, but merely on the principle of volition according to which, without regard to any of the faculty of desire, the action has been done” (Kant 12-13). To act from duty entails performing the right action because it is the right action (and resisting to act because it’s morally wrong). Furthermore, as Kant describes in his fourth case scenario,
…show more content…
Kant states that “within the moral cognition of ordinary human reason we have arrived at its principle. To be sure, such reason does not think of this principle abstractly in its universal from, but does always have it actually in view and odes use it as the standard of judgment” (15). Humans have the capacity to be moved by reason, therefore acting from duty is performing one’s duty in acting on it. Because we have reasoned that it is an act of obligation. Humans have the capability of reason which provides us to be capable of making judgments. But, it seems that human nature is meant to intertwine judgments with motivations and desires. Emotion and reaction is where the sense of moral obligation comes from, and without it, human moral seems lacking the comprehensibility and accessibility that it needs. Human rationality has an inclination to a good deed. Therefore, to dismiss motivation as a whole becomes a rejection of the rational human mind. To use lying as an example for the case of reasoning with inclination, if one had the option to lie or tell the truth, the expression of reason along side desire and motivation is evident. Judgment is used on the basis of the determination of taking action on a lie. With this, it might be an initial thought that lying is bad (and Kant would agree). But, based on the situation, this initial judgment can change, as pointed out with the ax murder thought experiment. And with this, motivation and emotion intertwine with initial judgments to exercise the correct action at the time. This being a good action based on good intent, provides a prominent element of human
Kant states that “within the moral cognition of ordinary human reason we have arrived at its principle. To be sure, such reason does not think of this principle abstractly in its universal from, but does always have it actually in view and odes use it as the standard of judgment” (15). Humans have the capacity to be moved by reason, therefore acting from duty is performing one’s duty in acting on it. Because we have reasoned that it is an act of obligation. Humans have the capability of reason which provides us to be capable of making judgments. But, it seems that human nature is meant to intertwine judgments with motivations and desires. Emotion and reaction is where the sense of moral obligation comes from, and without it, human moral seems lacking the comprehensibility and accessibility that it needs. Human rationality has an inclination to a good deed. Therefore, to dismiss motivation as a whole becomes a rejection of the rational human mind. To use lying as an example for the case of reasoning with inclination, if one had the option to lie or tell the truth, the expression of reason along side desire and motivation is evident. Judgment is used on the basis of the determination of taking action on a lie. With this, it might be an initial thought that lying is bad (and Kant would agree). But, based on the situation, this initial judgment can change, as pointed out with the ax murder thought experiment. And with this, motivation and emotion intertwine with initial judgments to exercise the correct action at the time. This being a good action based on good intent, provides a prominent element of human