Importance Of Kant's Ethics

Superior Essays
Kant’s Ethics- Morals, Happiness, and Human Life Kant’s Ethics is a work that reflects how Immanuel Kant perceived ethics through morals and happiness and painted a picture of human life through these things. Ethics is what is defined as things that guide a person’s actions or their behavior. In Kant’s Groundwork, he discusses morals- what we consider to be right and wrong, and how we feel or duty, good will, or inclinations influence our morals which in turn influence our actions. Another thing that is crucial in Kant’s ethics is the role of happiness- are we selfish all of the time or do we ever want to do for others? Through morals and happiness in Kant’s Ethics, Kant paints a picture of what human looks like from this perspective. In …show more content…
It becomes very obvious as the reader reads through the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals that selfishness and dutifulness are enormous components of Kant’s view on ethics. Kant’s view remains the same throughout all parts of his Groundwork… that being selfish is not considered moral and that doing things from a dutiful mindset can make all of the difference in a moral action. Just as a dutiful mindset can turn bad quickly so can happiness. As mentioned earlier, people would like to think that they do things for others to make themselves happy but more times than not they do for themselves to be happy. Happiness really all depends on how you let yourself go about it. Kant remains consistent in his thinking about morality and happiness throughout everything discussed in the first two sections of his …show more content…
As the reader reads through the different sections, Kant continually makes statements regarding how humans can be so selfish and sometimes they do not even realize it. Although Kant paints this picture of a selfish human life, he also paints a vivid picture of a life of a dutiful and truly helpful human being. In the first section of the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant continually reminds the reader that doing actions from a sense of duty and truly wanting to help others is what gives the feeling of true morality and happiness. Many different philosophers over time have studied and proposed many ideas of human life and how it should be and how it could be done, and they have all varied slightly from one another. For example, Aristotle focused on happiness and pleasure, and some have focused on a human’s responsibility and identities. All of these perspectives have shaped the way that human life is expressed but Kant’s perspective focuses on a deeper perspective. In Section 2, Kant says “On the contrary, if we attend to experience of people's conduct we meet frequent and, as we ourselves admit, just complaints that no certain example can be cited of the disposition to act from pure duty; that, though much may be done in conformity with what duty commands, still it is always doubtful whether it is really done from duty and therefore has moral worth. Hence there have at all

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Kant believed that desires and emotions do not play an essential role with how a person rejects or embraces morality (Kant, Abbott & Denis, 2005). In fact, morality should not be influenced with desires and emotions because in itself, morality is a sense of duty. As such, actions which are guided by morality do not seek for rewards but instead, such actions seek to fulfill a duty, which should be considered…

    • 1269 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Immanuel Kant published A Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785) five years after Bentham’s Principles of Morals and Legislations, launching a scathing critique of utilitarianism. Kant proposed that a moral action does not suggest treating individuals as a means to an end. What Kant means by this is that we treat individuals for the sake of something else (means), such as Dudley and Stephens treating Parker as a means to maximise happiness. Instead, a moral action is one that treats individuals as ends in themselves, one that does not account for external influences such as happiness. Individuals are worthy of dignity and respect not because we own our bodies and minds but because we are rational beings, capable of reason and conscious thought. Kant claimed that we are likewise autonomous beings, equipped with the freedom to act and make moral decisions. He concluded that these abilities enforce us to oblige to moral laws and codes.…

    • 1238 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Immanuel Kant On Duty

    • 1621 Words
    • 7 Pages

    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.…

    • 1621 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    What we ought to do, or what we must do, is determined by morality which employs us to fulfill duties that otherwise would be wrong not to fulfill. But in Immanuel Kant’s Chapter Two of the “Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals”, he argues the existence of autonomy and how we can choose for ourselves what we ought to do that is vital for morality. Kant claims, “The word ‘respect’ is the only suitable expression for the esteem that a rational being must necessarily feel for such lawgiving. Autonomy is thus the basis of the dignity of human nature and of every rational nature” (336). Autonomy simply put is the ability to freely live your own life based on reasons and motives that are followed by your own choices, not the choices and influences of others (339). In addition, the principle of autonomy is to obey our behavior to principles that express of the rational will and ought to be followed along with universal…

    • 1213 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the first of three primary factors Kant explains, that every individual should harbor the obligation of “duties.” Kant felt that for each person to be the greatest individual they could possibly be they had to try and obtain ultimate happiness while learning to survive. Kant describes various qualities as having the possibility of good as well as the possibility for evil. “Wit, the power of judgment and like talents of the mind…courage…as with gifts of fortune…power, wealth,…

    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Universal Law Case Study

    • 1316 Words
    • 6 Pages

    My conclusion is that Kant has a clear idea of how to question ourselves about this simple actions. To be responsible for our own body, life, welfare, happiness and also to be honest, to be a man of honor, and to help others to succeed in life. At the end of the day, we all are human beings striving to survive and pursuing happiness. If we all take the time to inquire ourselves this simple question, every time we have to make a decision, wether it is or is it not this action a universal law of nature. Eventually, we will become better human beings. We all should remember that takes a village to raise a…

    • 1316 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Kant believed that autonomy and rationality are the reason why we are part of a community. We have to be conscious of our decision as well as the consequences. Contrary to utilitarianism which try to include people even though they are not autonomous or rational. To them, being capable of feeling happiness is enough to be a part of a community. Both theories have pros and cons, but ultimately they provide us with new interesting that will help us develop the best theory to describe moral status and…

    • 709 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    People intrinsically feel as though they must repay those around them for helping them find their freedom and autonomy. Kant theorizes that out of good will toward others, people uphold their moral duty and do not take emotional factors such as pride and satisfaction into account. This leads into the main point of Kant’s perspective, that the action itself determines morality rather than the outcome that is achieved. By being faithful to their duty to their communities people retain their autonomy and act on their freedom, which reinforces Kant’s definition of humanity. The individual is being moral for the good of everyone involved, including themselves. Kant believes that humans are not pure rational beings but that since morality is derived from duties, what is moral can be considered rational but not always nice. Emotions are not consistent, and because of this Kant believes that the morality of an action cannot depend on chance as it would if feelings were a key factor. For example, a person who has road rage is much more likely to make spiteful decisions than that same person when they have an uneventful commute home. Using rationality as a method of measurement and knowing for sure whether a decision is moral does eliminate the probabilities that those with proper intentions could be considered immoral. I think that from Kant’s perspective immoral…

    • 1716 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Kant and Aristotle are both philosophers who have different views about the highest human good and morality. Kant believes the only thing perfectly good is the good will (Haber 1993, 61). It is independent of other influences and acts in accordance with duty. The good will is intrinsically good, good without qualification. However, that is not to say everything a human does is done with good will, hence why it is based off duty. One such duty of humans is to secure their own happiness (Haber 1993, 65). However, as the duty of achieving is contained and only possess moral worth by following a set of moral laws. There are also two kinds of duty, perfect and imperfect duties that can be applied to others or self (Haber 1993, 72). All duties have…

    • 1180 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Immanuel Kant was prevalent philosopher who focused on the morality in his 18th century work “Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals.” Here, he separates the branches of knowledge, what is inherently good, and the imperatives to guide morality.…

    • 1633 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Well, the best way to test this claim it to run a maxim that shows people not acting selflessly for the benefice of others and prove its immorality according to the universal law formulation. So, imagine the maxim, “I will walk past the drowning stranger in order to get to work on time.” If such a maxim, became universal law, meaning everyone walked past drowning strangers to get to work on time, one, would the maxim be effective and, two, would this be a desirable world to live in? The answer to number one is yes, because, unlike lying, nothing about the maxim being a part of instinctual nature makes it less effective. You could still make it to work on time by not saving a drowning stranger, even if everyone avoided the drowning stranger for the same end. However, the answer to question two, is seemingly no. Not many people would desire to live in a world full of self-interested people, who cannot sacrifice being a few minutes late to work to save a stranger. In this way, the universal law formulation argues that not sacrificing personal interests for the benefit of another is immoral in this case. So, the formulation proves the claim, that Kant’s moral theory sometimes requires people to help others, regardless if doing so is against personal…

    • 1417 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Kant is a firm believer of duty based ethics, meaning that one’s morality is defined by ones motives. Thus, Kant believes that an action should be performed simply because it’s the right thing to do, and for no other reason. Also, Kant states that duty defines intrinsic value, meaning that a person’s motives for what they do should have ends within themselves, without consequences or desired satisfaction being built into their actions. Kant also states the one should act so that the maximum of your action can and should be made into universal law, expressing that the actions of your motives should apply to everyone in the same way. Thus, bringing us to the fact that action from duty has to be an categorical imperative, meaning that everyone should and would be able to act the same way, sharing equal positioning. Lastly, Kant presents A priori ideas, which in term is a special kind of idea that tells you about the possibility of human experience, however these experiences don’t depend on experience that you have already had, but are supplied by reason in order to make sense of an…

    • 1295 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Kant’s theory is based on the moral law and duty as an action that should be treated respectfully. By ‘moral dilemma’ we understand the heart-wrenching decision that carries strong intuitive and emotional weight and can lead to a failure of duty (Garlikov 2). This action is influenced by the individual’s desire to act within the principles of the duty. Immanuel Kant explains that an individual can only do the right thing for the right reason, even though acting on duty is not always sufficient, as it can lead a person to do the right thing for the wrong reason. Acting from duty is the only justification what makes this law absolute and universal. Moreover, as long as the moral law does not depend on our desires, it consists of what is called ‘categorical imperatives’ in Kant’s philosophical works (Gakuran…

    • 698 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill demonstrate two contrasting moral theories. The philosophers have very different ideas about ethics and happiness. Immanuel Kant, author of “Duty and Reason”, believed in the morality of the good will and duty. According to Kant, happiness is an emotion unable to be controlled while motive is controllable; therefore, duty is the most important aspect of leading a moral life. Conversely, John Stuart Mill, who wrote, “The Greatest Happiness Principle”, is well known as a utilitarian, who stress the greatest happiness for the greatest amount. While they may have disagreed about what makes an action ethical, Kant and Mill are both extremely significant philosophers. Further acknowledgement of the contrasting…

    • 1751 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He based his values on the principles that everyone has a duty in life and it’s in everyone’s reason to remember that they are worth something. People should always be eager to help others and there should be a communal ambition to have human respect through moral reasoning. Kant’s ultimate goal in his lifetime was to convince people that they should obey their principles as people and not justify your choices due to someone that other people are convincing you to do. You have the right to choose freely and your choices will most likely intertwine with your moral system. Kant was a…

    • 703 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays