Our textbook define the term Deontology as, “An ethical theory that disregards the importance of consequences and focuses only on the rightness or wrongness of the act itself “ (p. G-2). In other words, regardless of the final result, is the intentionality of the act that really counts. Then, Duty is closed related to Deontology because is the basis of this theory. For Kant, Duty is something that must be obligatory and the will is your own conviction to do it with pleasure to fulfill according to duty.
2. what is Kant's definition of Duty compared to Eichmanns?
Kant’s definition of Duty is concerned about good intentions that must be obligatory without taking into account the final results. Instead, Adolph Eichmann definition of duty is concerned …show more content…
What does it mean to treat someone as “an end in him- or herself,” rather than a means (only)?
In the above example of teachers and students, students use teacher to learn, pass the courses, and graduate from school and teachers use the students to get their salary. They need each other and this is, to treat someone as “an end”. However, teachers or professors, “surely do not imagine that the students were put on the earth to feed them or pay their mortgage” (Rosenstand, 298). To see others as a mean to an end only, would be if teachers see students as people which only purpose on earth is to feed them.
9.. What is Kant’s criterion of rationality for the recognition of personhood? What (or who) does it leave out?
Kant’s criterion of rationality for the recognition of personhood is that instead of rational minds, animals are instinctive. Then, the instinctive minds does not allow them to take free choices such as what to eat or where to sleep. For that reason, Kant’s left out animals of his criterion of rationality and states, “Although animals and humans all have wills that propel them toward their goals, only humans have free choices” (Rosenstand, 300), for the fact that only humans are capable to think and take moral
2. what is Kant's definition of Duty compared to Eichmanns?
Kant’s definition of Duty is concerned about good intentions that must be obligatory without taking into account the final results. Instead, Adolph Eichmann definition of duty is concerned …show more content…
What does it mean to treat someone as “an end in him- or herself,” rather than a means (only)?
In the above example of teachers and students, students use teacher to learn, pass the courses, and graduate from school and teachers use the students to get their salary. They need each other and this is, to treat someone as “an end”. However, teachers or professors, “surely do not imagine that the students were put on the earth to feed them or pay their mortgage” (Rosenstand, 298). To see others as a mean to an end only, would be if teachers see students as people which only purpose on earth is to feed them.
9.. What is Kant’s criterion of rationality for the recognition of personhood? What (or who) does it leave out?
Kant’s criterion of rationality for the recognition of personhood is that instead of rational minds, animals are instinctive. Then, the instinctive minds does not allow them to take free choices such as what to eat or where to sleep. For that reason, Kant’s left out animals of his criterion of rationality and states, “Although animals and humans all have wills that propel them toward their goals, only humans have free choices” (Rosenstand, 300), for the fact that only humans are capable to think and take moral