Fundamental Principles Of The Metaphysics Of Morals By Immanuel Kant

analytical Essay
1058 words
1058 words

Immanuel Kant was a philosopher who was born on April 22nd, 1724, and lived his life in Konigsberg, Prussia. He received his doctorate in philosophy in 1755, and soon after began writing works on philosophical ideas. Kant was a theist, and tried to acquire an understanding of human actions and goodwill. In his novel, “Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals”, Kant primarily discusses his opinions of goodwill, morals, and the ability to cause events through free will. Kant has expressed a plethora of great ideas within his work, and I wholeheartedly agree with Kant’s views on the way of life and morality. Kant expresses his belief that there are hypothetical and categorical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives are rules of skill, …show more content…

In this essay, the author

  • Describes immanuel kant as a philosopher born on april 22nd, 1724, and lived his life in konigsberg, prussia. he received his doctorate in philosophy in 1755.
  • Explains kant's belief that there are hypothetical and categorical imperatives, which are framed in the sense of cause and effect relationships.
  • Explains kant's three propositions on obligations — duty, volition, and the necessity of action from respect for law.
  • Explains that kant believes that the world needs more genuine universal laws that are developed by reason.
  • Analyzes how kant believes that we have an imperfect duty to benevelence, but how far that duty extends is unknown.
  • Opines that they agree with kant on all of his positions, including his propositions, ideas on genuine laws, hypothetical and categorical imperative, and holding imperfect duty.

Kant defines the first proposition of duty as “indicate in the imperative itself, by some determinate expression, that in the case of volition from duty all interest is renounced, which is the specific criterion of categorical as distinguished from hypothetical imperatives.” He means that based on volition is how good an act truly is, not the effects of the action. For example, a male walks an older lady across the street to get a positive reaction from people, that does not make the action good. If the male had thought about walking the older woman across the street for the sake of her safety and proceeded on doing so, that would be an act of good. The second proposition of duty is defined as “…An action done from duty derives its moral worth, not from the purpose which is to be attained by it, but from the maxim by which it is determined, and therefore does not depend on the realization of the object of the action, but merely on the principle of volition by which the action has taken place, without regard to any object of desire.” (Pg.3) The purpose acquired from an action does not define its moral worth, its subjective principle of action does. An example of this is not killing an elephant because it has not worth to you does not confine within this proposition. Not killing an elephant because of the thought of them going extinct, would be in the realm of this proposition. The third proposition being a …show more content…

But how far that duty extends is unaware. This is genuinely a duty, the rich in society cannot think that they are better than someone. Since everyone Is morally equal and need to compare towards moral perfection, not materialistic things. Everyone can be a moral person, but making profit isn’t essential for being a moral. Going out of your way when you have a decent amount of profit and working for the public would be. In Kant 's Metaphysics, he defends the right of private property. It doesn’t get formalized until we get a social contract, and what everybody works for is their private property. Nature isn’t made private property until a contract is formed and is recognized politically under moral rights. To Kant the poor can go to the rich and demand a certain amount of money based on moral right through pure

Get Access