Philosophy is a discipline that studies how one ought to live, as well as study reality, nature, existence, etc. However, there are a number of philosophers who propose differing sets of morals and have different ideas of living life to its fullest (Singer v. Mill). Kant proposes that moral actions are defined by the motivation of an action, and later on explains that moral actions are duties through reason, rather than inclination. This essay will explain the validity of Kant’s argument by first explaining Kant’s view on duty, then analyse his view of duty as an object of good will, which pertains to motivations without the slightest selfishness, then argue for moral duties motivated by duty instead of inclination based on reason. It is difficult…
Philippa Foot in her text “Morality as a System of Hypothetical Imperatives” argues against the claim that moral judgments cannot be hypothetical imperatives, first presented by the philosopher Immanuel Kant. As found in her introduction on page 68-69 of the textbook, her argument is that moral judgments are categorical rather than hypothetical. But before one can explain her argument one must define and explain what hypothetical and categorical imperatives are. Kant himself wrote all imperatives command either hypothetically or categorically. He says that hypothetical imperatives “present the practical necessity of a possible action as a means to achieving something else which one desires.”…
This example shows why Kantian Ethics interferes with our deeply held moral intuitions. There are times like this where lying seems absolutely necessary, however that completely goes against Kantian…
In the book, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant lays out his theory for making moral decisions. Unlike many other philosophers, Kant focuses not on the consequences of actions, but on the maxim in which the action was performed; in addition, Kant also tries to find his moral theory a priori instead of through empirical experience. He attempts to formulate a theory grounded through pure reason in which he bases his moral law on something that has never been experienced before that we are able to imagine and strive towards. Kant’s theory circles around the idea of a Supreme Principle of Morality called the Categorical Imperative which encompasses the Formula of Universal Law and the Formula of Humanity; all of which I will…
Immanuel Kant’s basis for “Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals” is an objective view into how and why decisions are made among rational beings for the furtherance of their and society’s wellbeing. Through his view in the 1700’s we can see how much of a scientific stance Kant took in journalizing his analyzation of his own and society’s morals. Kant lists five “formulations” that are involved in rational decision-making. Rational beings have utilized the “Categorical Imperative” to shape today’s society by way of relationships and treatises. These formulations give rational beings an expanded view of the many faces of the Categorical Imperative.…
Immanuel Kant’s Moral Theory is widely studied in philosophy and the field of ethics. In his theory, Kant expresses the ways to determine the morality of an action: examining the intentions behind the action in question is most important instead of merely considering the consequences. Moral actions, he explains, must have the intention of being consistent with duty for the sake of duty and doing the right thing; they cannot be motivated by any inclinations. Actions inconsistent with duty would be, for example, lying, cheating, stealing, or breaking a promise. These actions could never be moral in any case since they defy the honesty of duty.…
I agree with Hume's argument, “morality is sentiment”, because sometimes, my feelings impact my actions and my attitudes. Depending on my feelings, I do things differently than I would do when I am emotionally stable. If it is asked right or wrong, I would say it is wrong because we live in a society where rules are required to obey and follow whether we have born naturally evil or have born good and pure. We can understand someone's action in the view of Hume's but we cannot justify his or her action.…
Questions pertaining to whether certain actions are morally right or morally wrong are never easy to settle. There are various moral theories that try to address the question, divine command theory, virtue ethics, ethical egoism, cultural relativism, to name just a few. There is, of course, not much agreement among moral philosophers as to which is correct. There is, however, much agreement on what is actually morally right or morally wrong. The merits of a particular moral theory will depend (in part) on whether or not it can account for actions most of us consider to be right.…
One individual’s responsibility ends where another person’s responsibility begins. Kant claims that the liar attempts to manage the consequences, ignoring interests of other people and affecting the future determination of events. Therefore, the liar takes the full responsibility of the consequences caused by his lie, however in knowing all of this people still choose to take the risks associated with lying (Korsgaard, n.d.). Discussing the problem, Kant initiates the casuistical problem, the so-called issue of a lie to the murderer at the door. In the ‘Metaphysical Principles of Virtue’, Kant argues that lying is a violation of a perfect duty to oneself.…
Today, more than ever, Article five of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is of upmost importance. Everyday there is a national story of individuals being harmed, or killed due to their race. Most recently, the mass murder that took place in Charleston South Carolina, where nine individuals were murdered in hopes of fueling a race riot. Another common news story centering on the violation of article five are the numerous reports of alleged police brutality related to race. Police brutality is define as, “A civil rights violation that occurs when a police officer acts with excessive force by using an amount of force with regards to a civilian that is more than necessary.…
So the duty is to act "morally" even if the direct consequences are immoral, because Kant believes consequences to be morally neutral. A person free from moral obligation can choose to act subjectively and will act in a way to get their desired end. Since Kant believes consequences are morally neutral a person can only be moral in their actions. A person can only be moral in their actions by obeying their duty to the categorical imperatives which are the supreme moral law. To be human beings according to Kant, the imperatives for actions needs to come from moral categorical.…
I will argue that my personal moral system derives important elements from the moral theories of Kant on the highest good, and Foot on virtue. I will illustrate my argument with the situation of giving money to a homeless man. First the situation must be explained. I am walking in Chicago, and there is a homeless man on the street.…
The action can be determined by the person’s motive. If the person acts of good will and from duty, their motives were good is their intentions. According to Kant, lying does not accord with the duty and therefore would not be morally worthy. That the person’s motive is to simply follow their duty and not indulge in themselves. Kant believed lying was always wrong.…
Kant’s moral theory is based on the fact that one’s action should be governed by a maxim that follows the purity of the will; the idea that one’s actions should be based on a will that aligns with duty and not on the consequences of one’s actions. In the contrary, rule utilitarianism is based on the consequences of one’s actions and how it impacts the overall happiness of the individuals involved. The following paper focuses on the ideas of duty ethics and utilitarian ethics; and how these ideas can be implemented in the case of James Liang. Kant believes that an act is morally acceptable when such an act perfectly aligns with one’s duty. Furthermore, he believed that all rational beings are obligated by the demands of duty.…
In the case of morals, philosophers are usually separated into one of two categories, those who consider actions ethical or not ethical based on their motives, and those who consider an action ethical or not ethical based on the consequences of these actions. Immanuel Kant is a deontologist as opposed to consequentialists, making him an advocate for the former category. Kant is of the opinion that we are held responsible for our actions because we possess the ability to consider and explain the things we do, so any moral judgment should be based on our reasons for doing things. We should of course always contemplate the consequences of our actions, but they are not entirely at the mercy of our reason. Reason is only accountable for the…