Kant's Theory Of Morality

829 Words 4 Pages
In ethics we focus on defining morality by study old theories about morality. Many philosophers tell us how we ought to live to be moral, which make me realize that there are no specific guidelines for morality. Moral rules are, basically, universal moral principles, and they are rules that apply anywhere and anytime. Since brilliant philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Bentham, Hune… cannot come up with the perfect rules for morality, then I think morality belongs to the noumenal world. According to Kant, things in the noumenal world are beyond human limitation to understand. Since morality does not exist in the phenomenal world, then universal moral principles don’t exist, either. Universal moral principle is such a broad term, thus …show more content…
So, let take a different approach, and look at Kant’s viewpoint. Kant believes that there are two worlds, one is the phenomenal world and the other is noumenal world. The phenomenal world is the world of appearance and experience. The world we are living in is the phenomenal world, because we can see, feel, hear, and understanding things in the world. Subjects like art, science, and music are part of the phenomenal world due to our understanding, and the ability to explain/express those subjects. On the other hand, the noumenal world is beyond human limitation to see, feel, or understand. Anything that human cannot understand or explain are parts of the noumenal world. My interpretation of morality in Kant’s theory is: Since no one knows who created morality, or explains what it is. Morality is not just right or wrong, it beyond that; it beyond explanation. Therefore, morality belongs to the noumenal world, and it is useless trying to understand morality or make absolute rule for it. Some people believe that philosophers understand what morality is, than why do philosophers still trying to understand morality since Socrates’s time? No one actually understands what it exactly is. If morality belongs to the noumenal world, than the universal moral principles cannot exist. Both Rachels and Kant take two different approaches toward morality, but they share similar goal. Rachels believes all moral codes are equal, and they are base on culture. Also, there are no moral codes that apply for all culture. Kant sees things either exists in the phenomenal or noumenal world. My interpretation of Kant’s theory is morality exist in the noumenal world. Rachels’s and Kant’s theory’s goal is to show that universal moral principles don’t exist in this

Related Documents