preview

The Categorical Imperative By John Kant

analytical Essay
1263 words
1263 words
bookmark

Essay #1: In “The Categorical Imperative,” Kant makes arguments concerning moral value of an action (maxim/ rule of conduct), and urges that morality is the inborn quality, which determines actions. His argument is that motivation should determine action, without worrying for the results. His views suggest that if the motivation is moral, the actions would be morally correct, and that the results would be acceptable, regardless of others’ views and acceptance for such actions. Kant’s arguments, in addition to being complex and incoherent, sound very subjective and impractical. John Stuart Mill’s arguments link happiness with morality. The author argues that individuals’ actions, moral or otherwise, aim to make them happy. If an action makes one happy, that action is moral, and such an argument may not be entirely true. In "The Nature of Virtue," Aristotle talks about two types of virtues, …show more content…

In this essay, the author

  • Analyzes kant's arguments concerning moral value of an action, and urges that morality is the inborn quality, which determines actions.
  • Analyzes how john stuart mill's arguments link happiness with morality. mill argues that individuals' actions, moral or otherwise, aim to make them happy.
  • Analyzes how aristotle's "the nature of virtue" talks about two types of virtues, one relating to teaching and learning and the other with habit. morality is a learning process.
  • Analyzes how virginia held's "the ethics of care" talks about caring and emotions, suggesting that caring is value and moral, and fulfilling the needs of the cared ones is moral.
  • Compares kant, mill, aristotle, and help's arguments for inborn quality and learning processes.
  • Compares kant's argument that morality is inborn quality with mill' argument of happiness, which relates to psychology and mindset, but the two arguments are different.
  • Argues that the views of aristotle, mill, and held are similar in some ways. if the actions deliver good results, they become ethical actions.
  • Opines that aristotle's views are more realistic, since ethical behaviors are acceptable to others and are learning process in a given context.
  • Opines that aristotle's approach is more reasonable and practical, suggesting that individuals can learn ethical values over time and with exposures, and thus be better persons.
  • Explains that certain views, especially those along the "religious" lines, may talk about values and practices described in such books, but such views and arguments may not fit well with the latter time.
  • Opines that applying high ethical values and principles is difficult, complex, and easier.
  • Analyzes kant, mill, aristotle, and held's ethical philosophies, which are interesting and valuable information.

As I see it, ethical behaviors, which essentially mean, to my reading, acting manners that are acceptable to others and are learning process in that given, certain context. It also is true that certain inborn and qualities may exist. For example, serving water to a thirsty individual, with or without learning process, may be an inborn/natural quality, and that such actions would not consider whether the thirsty individual would say thank you or some other similar words after drinking water. Serving water, which may relate to Held’s caring argument, may not be an action purely to be happy either, as suggested by Mill. Such an action, even if that sounds like caring, could be just a spontaneous duty, untaught and irrelevant to the arguments of caring, learned ethics and happiness, and not reward intended. Regardless, such a spontaneous action, even if very valuable, is usually rare; whereas, in today’s context, one needs to be ethical in many disciplines each day and among all. For that reason, Aristotle’s views are more

Get Access