Under the situation, I am a poor and uneducated person from Chicago, who trained hard for the only way of success in our life, particularly distance running athletics. I always almost win in particularly distance running and marathon races, so have places but never got a title in major race. In view of this, I have to choose whether take the new drug to win the Chicago Marathon with cash prize of $50,000 and the opportunity of lucrative endorsement of a famous running-shoe company which only need to offer $5,000 back to the friend for the drug if I win the prize, or deny the advice of using drug, yet maybe never have the achievement to out of poverty.
Fundamentally based on the lecture note 3 said that, through the Kantian moral theory, …show more content…
(2004, February 23). 2. Good Will, Moral Worth and Duty. Kant's Moral Philosophy. “Since a good will is good under any factor, its goodness must not depend on any particular conditions obtaining.” and indicated that Kant’s analysis believed the only thing good without condition is “good will”, which can simply decode as “good hearted”. A good will correspond to the decisions are made with morally worthy and cannot contain certain valuable ends, whether for yourself or others. It shows that every choice have a good will, then it becomes as good whatever the result is favorable or not. However, only the motivation which are intrinsically good can be a good will. In case of competitor using drug to gain the game, using drug to win already is not a right intention, the action is not due to kindness, yet it is only for the goal of winning. It neither can be counted as a good will, nor counted as good. It is intrinsically wrong because the motive of action is wrong in itself, …show more content…
Reference by Rohlf, M. (2010, May 20). 5.4 The categorical imperative. Immanuel Kant. “We are always free in the sense that we always have the capacity to govern ourselves rationally instead of letting our desires set our ends for us.” Expressed that under categorical imperatives, the actions that morally good should have autonomy. Also, quoted from Kemerling, G. (n.d.). Alternative Formulae for the Categorical Imperative. Kant: The Moral Order. “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means.” brings out the concern of Kant’s morality theory categorical second imperative; we should treat yourself and others as humanity but not as a machine or the means of an end. In the status, using drug would be alternative rather than my autonomous wish. Moreover, it damages the alternative of other participators to participate a fair race. Furthermore, if I get the victory by taking the drug, the equity would be ruined, and other participants treated as pedal of success, as tools of profit. It not only ignore the autonomy of me and other competitors, but also neglect the value of mankind. Hence, the action of using drug to win is incorrect because it totally violates the premise of Kant’s moral
Fundamentally based on the lecture note 3 said that, through the Kantian moral theory, …show more content…
(2004, February 23). 2. Good Will, Moral Worth and Duty. Kant's Moral Philosophy. “Since a good will is good under any factor, its goodness must not depend on any particular conditions obtaining.” and indicated that Kant’s analysis believed the only thing good without condition is “good will”, which can simply decode as “good hearted”. A good will correspond to the decisions are made with morally worthy and cannot contain certain valuable ends, whether for yourself or others. It shows that every choice have a good will, then it becomes as good whatever the result is favorable or not. However, only the motivation which are intrinsically good can be a good will. In case of competitor using drug to gain the game, using drug to win already is not a right intention, the action is not due to kindness, yet it is only for the goal of winning. It neither can be counted as a good will, nor counted as good. It is intrinsically wrong because the motive of action is wrong in itself, …show more content…
Reference by Rohlf, M. (2010, May 20). 5.4 The categorical imperative. Immanuel Kant. “We are always free in the sense that we always have the capacity to govern ourselves rationally instead of letting our desires set our ends for us.” Expressed that under categorical imperatives, the actions that morally good should have autonomy. Also, quoted from Kemerling, G. (n.d.). Alternative Formulae for the Categorical Imperative. Kant: The Moral Order. “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means.” brings out the concern of Kant’s morality theory categorical second imperative; we should treat yourself and others as humanity but not as a machine or the means of an end. In the status, using drug would be alternative rather than my autonomous wish. Moreover, it damages the alternative of other participators to participate a fair race. Furthermore, if I get the victory by taking the drug, the equity would be ruined, and other participants treated as pedal of success, as tools of profit. It not only ignore the autonomy of me and other competitors, but also neglect the value of mankind. Hence, the action of using drug to win is incorrect because it totally violates the premise of Kant’s moral