Immanuel Kant, a staunch idealist is most widely known for his work on the Duty Ethics. His work of Duty Ethics has been widely criticized for hundreds of years in part due to his extreme approach at life and ethics alike. Duty Ethics as Kant describes, involves the use of pure reason with the end goal of transcending the phenomenal world. Kant is able to apply his teachings many times throughout history, and in one case in particular alongside Maria von Herbert. It is within this particular case that Kant’s idea of Duty Ethics is put into question as being somewhat too extreme, ultimately resulting in the suicide of von Herbert. Overall, Kant’s Duty Ethics to me is over the top, particularly due to his belief in that every action is a …show more content…
Kant’s ethical theory, Duty Ethics is one that takes an extreme look into the lives of oneself and others, ultimately offering a standard upon which to base one’s life. The idea of Duty Ethics is broken down into two separate worlds. The first of the two worlds, the phenomenal world also known as the world of physical things works solely according to physical laws. A being that acts at the physical level is one that is heteronymous and is given a false sense of freedom. The second world is the noumenal world also known as the world of pure reason. A being that works at the world of pure reason is autonomous or truly free. These two worlds are important to Duty Ethics because the ultimate goal of Duty Ethics is to use pure reason to transcend the phenomenal world into the noumenal world. Kant later explains however, that the only way for one to transcend into the noumenal world is by obeying the categorical imperative, a command that obligates all rational beings, in all categories, all the time through pure reason. There are two …show more content…
Maria was a very troubled woman who had recently confessed to the man she loved of a previous relationship in which the man abused the trust she put in him. In her letters to Kant, Maria explains that she is unable to use her sense of reason when she feels she needs it most. She later makes a point that she should not end her life simply because she is tormented but rather she should live because of her being. In her explanation of her thoughts behind her choice, Maria is explaining to Kant that she no longer sees the need to live when she merely lives to become closer to death. She continues by telling Kant that she is perfectly able to use her pure reason when it comes to anything else in life, but she is unable to reason her way through her decision between life and death because she no longer sees a desire to live any longer. In Kant’s response to Maria, he more so responds to her problem with the man she loves despite what she had to say about ending her life. He brings up the point that she shouldn’t be concerned about the consequences of the actions she has made in the past because she has made the right decision in confronting her loved one due to her use of reason. Kant does little in comforting her broken heart, but rather explains that with time, focusing on instruction and penalty, she will ultimately find comfort. In my opinion, the advice given
Kant believed consequences were irrelevant and an individual should do as they please at that very moment in time. An example would be a person went to their neighbor’s home while they were gone to turn on the heater so when they returned home it was warm. A consequence to turning on their heater is their house burned down, but according to Kant, since your intentions were good you cannot be at fault. Kant also believed each person has dignity and not to treat others as a means, to one’s personals ends (Rich, 2008). In other words, do not treat others as an instrument to achieve a goal. For example, a researcher that is risking the well-being of an individual participating in an experiment for the sake of finding a drug that may save many lives.
Johnson, R. (2013). Kant’s moral philosophy. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2013 Edition). Zalta, E. (Ed.). Retrieved online from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2013/entries/kant-moral/
Throughout Kant’s, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, some questionable ideas are portrayed. These ideas conflict with the present views of most people living today.
According to Kant “… nothing can protect us from a complete falling away from our idea of duty and preserve in the soul a well-grounded respect for duty’s law except the clear conviction that, even if there never have been actions springing from such pure source, the question at issue here is not whether this or that happened but that reason of itself and independently of all experience commands what ought to happen.” (Kant, Page 20(lines 407-412)). Kant points out that the duty is done not because of the ends but because of what is fundamentally good or
Deontological ethical theory focuses on duty. It is viewed that humans have a duty in doing what is ethically right in any given situation. However, the categorical imperative does not have the same ideas it does not consist of duties to us. As Kant indicates in the idea of the Kingdom of Ends that our duty lies in treating all human beings as ends in and of them instead of as a means to an end it is perceived as being an extension of us. It is based on the desires of a person on how they want to be treated and will succeed as long as the universal good is applied as well. In other words, our actions and behaviors applied in our lives, we can see others imitating. For instance, can we see a world where everyone lied willingly? It does not make sense it would defeat the purpose of being able to identify the truth there would be no meaning. The ethical duty is to be truthful.
The second act of Kant’s categorical imperative pertains to how we treat others. According to Kant, we must “Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an
Philosophy is the study of knowledge, reality, existence and thought processes. Immanuel Kant from Prussia, (currently Russia) for whom was influential during the Enlightenment period; and John Stuart Mill from Great Britain whom was present during the Romantic era, explored ideas that they believed would create a more fair and just society, by trying to legislate morality. Morality cannot be legislated because it is a concept of right and wrong created by each different religion, region and culture; issues are not black and white.
Immanuel Kant is a popular modern day philosopher. He was a modest and humble man of his time. He never left his hometown, never married and never strayed from his schedule. Kant may come off as boring, while he was an introvert but he had a great amount to offer. His thoughts and concepts from the 1700s are still observed today. His most recognized work is from the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Here Kant expresses his idea of ‘The Good Will’ and the ‘Categorical Imperative’.
Kant’s moral philosophy is built around the formal principles of ethics rather than substantive human goods. He begins by outlining the principles of reasoning that can be equally expected of all rational persons regardless of their individual desires or partial interests. It creates an ideal universal community of rational individuals who can collectively agree on the moral principles for guiding equality and autonomy. This is what forms the basis for contemporary human rig...
Through his discussion of morals in the Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant explores the question of whether a human being is capable of acting solely out of pure duty and if our actions hold true moral value. In passage 407, page 19, Kant proposes that if one were to look at past experiences, one cannot be certain that his or her rationalization for performing an action that conforms with duty could rest solely on moral grounds. In order to fully explain the core principle of moral theory, Kant distinguishes between key notions such as a priori and a posteriori, and hypothetical imperative vs. categorical imperative, in order to argue whether the actions of rational beings are actually moral or if they are only moral because of one’s hidden inclinations.
Great philosophers such as Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill and Plato unwittingly weighed in on this story, long before it ever occurred. Immanuel Kant is considered a significant and influential figure in modern philosophy. He may have single handedly set the tone on how humanity conducts themselves in society. Kant’s Categorical Imperative is basically a set of principles that we should follow. Essentially, it is our moral duty to uphold these laws whether you want to or not and that they are universal, meaning no one is immune to the rules. Michael Yudanin states one “to be compliant with the moral law, it has to be universalizable, that is, it has to be capable to be thought as a universal law that binds everybody, everywhere, and at any point in time, without contradiction” (Yudanin).
People face ethical choices every day, and there are several different approaches towards reaching a decision. A professor is tasked with making a decision as to whether he should report a high-achieving student, Charlie, for plagiarizing an article. The professor must use reasoning and ethics. One of the most famous form of ethics is Kantian ethics, which is a form of deontology, or duty-based ethics. The professor can use Kantian ethics to make his decision, or he can take into account the context of the situation to further asses as I would do.
In Section One and Section Two of his work. Kant explores his position on his fundamental principle of morality, or his “categorical imperative”, or his idea that all actions are moral and “good” if they are performed as a duty. Such an idea is exemplified when he says, “I should never act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (Kant 14). The philosopher uses examples such as suicide and helping others in distress to apply his principal to possible real life situation. Kant is successful in regards to both issues. As a result, it means that categorical imperative can plausibly be understood as the fundamental principle of all morality. Kant’s reasoning for his categorical imperative is written in a way that makes the theory out to be very plausible.
#2 "Duty is the necessity to act out of reverence for the law." The definition of duty according to Kant is that it is a specific moral rule that is derivable from a universal moral code. Kant raises a distinction between perfect duties and imperfect duties. A perfect duty is one that one must always do and an imperfect duty is a duty which one must not ignore but admits of multiple means of fulfillment.
Immanuel Kant was a philosopher who made great contributions with his work on the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Kant’s interest with metaphysics left him in the company of Aristotle, who had the original work on metaphysics. Kant’s goal in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals was to find and make the supreme principal of morality. Kant covers several concepts in his work on metaphysics, some of the key concepts in his work are good will, moral worth, and imperatives. When it comes to good will Kant believes that “Nothing in the world—indeed nothing even beyond the world—can possibly be conceived which could be called good without qualification except a good will” 1. In the next key concept, moral worth, Kant believes that actions are only morally right depending on their motives, “an action done not from inclination but from duty” 2 is morally right according to Kant. Kant’s imperatives are broken down into two types, those being hypothetical and categorical. A hypothetical imperative is an “action that is good to some purpose, possible or actual” 3. A categorical imperative “directly commands a certain conduct without making its condition some purpose to be reached by it” 4. From these concepts you can tell that Kant is a perfect world philosopher who thinks that all humans are rational beings, who have preeminent good in them, and should always strive to be their best selves.