Kant Case Study

1240 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The theory of Immanuel Kant example

To summarize the case of study, which is about the research development and safety for a mid-sized chemical refinery discovers a 5,000 gallon tanks of toxic chemicals. Which has be drained 20 years ago, but has been left to rust for a long time and high probability it has rusted and leaked into the ground. The problem is if the chemicals leeched into the ground, 25 miles away is a Navajo reservation that drinks from the local reservoir. Also there are no government funds to help clean the mess, and it would take some years before the company has the appropriate funds to clean it up.
The choices I have is, A) quit your job, but keep quiet about the problem or, B) keep your job but whistle-blow. Both these outcomes do not have any favorable …show more content…

First putting down the basic of Kant theory is without look at any consequences of the outcome by choosing the plan even if I knew the tanks where leaking. The theory would not agree to this because Kant stats that the action should be good, which plan A is not saying anything is morally wrong to do. My reason is that Kant theory also stats that humans should not be harmed. Humanity as an end, never as merely a means, which simply means that human or not, hurting them is wrong morally. If I continue to keep quite I let the Navajo people continue to suffer this goes against Kant theory also by doing nothing is another problem. The maxim for this plan would be not try and hurt anyone because of the …show more content…

Does it go with Kant theory? I would agree that it does for one main reason would be because of telling the truth about the leaking of the tanks is a sense of duty to help others who are in need. The whole point of Kant’s theory is based around the idea of helping, and plan B has the concept of being a good samaritan. By choosing to help the Navajo people without looking at the consequences, but the action of what I am doing agrees with Kant. Also my sense of moral worth is another key feature of Kant’s theory because of my sense of duty to help, motivates my desire to do the right thing, in which the action of doing it feel morally right. Even if I caused a lot of damages to others, my sense of justification towards the action I did would feel like valued. What would the maxim be for this plan? That any serious problems should be reported to the proper

Show More
Related

  • How Is Harrison Bergeron Unethical

    1561 Words  | 4 Pages

    (Mark Dimmock) Kantian ethics is not the focus of the consequence but, rather focusing on completing the duty. Here is where Kantian Ethics can be seen in Harrison Bergeron. Kantian ethics has two branches the branch of Natural rights and Contract rights. Natural rights are the ones we are born with and contract rights are the ones society agrees upon. In “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. Harrison acted morally unethical because he broke the contract rights the government set up and distorted the life of the people by the way they

    Read More

  • Ethics in Nursing

    1924 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Rule Consequentialism And Kantian Ethics

    990 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...l sources of utility or consequences, but about his moral identity and integrity. Jim is presented with a situation that challenges to who he is, and not just simply what he should do. Granted, is tricky to decide on the “right” action in this case because by not partaking in the deal, Jim is staying true to his personal moral beliefs; yet he is still left with the burden of knowing that all twenty of the Indians would be killed without his interference. One could also argue that Jim would only be contributing to the problem if he too committed such acts against these innocent people and it is his duty as a moral being to not partake. It seems that Kant’s theory passes the standard of internal support and explanatory power. This is because his principles are able to fit with considered moral beliefs and are able to help individuals identify a right and wrong action.

    Read More

  • Kant and Crash: An Ethics Analysis

    1130 Words  | 3 Pages

    Many great philosophers have attempted to tackle the issue of ethics and, consequently, have come up with various ethical theories in order to define ethical and moral situations. In this paper, I will be summarizing a scene from the 2004, Academy Award winning film, Crash, and further analyzing it in terms of the ethical theories of Immanuel Kant. In terms of this scene, I will be arguing that Kant’s ethical theory provides a satisfactory analysis of its ethicality.

    Read More

  • Grounding For The Metaphysics Of Morals, By Immanuel Kant

    1044 Words  | 3 Pages

    Another, more obvious problem with the first step of the categorical imperative is the black and white nature of the world in Kant’s opinion. He simplifies morality to an extreme extent with no room for argument. For example, Kant believes that suicide is wrong, no matter what, because if this became a universal law, “one [would see] at once a contradiction in a system of nature whose law would destroy life by means of the very same feeling that acts so as to stimulate the furtherance of life, and hence there could be no existence as a system of nature” (Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, 31). However, suppose there is a case in which a rich person has an abundance of food, and a poor person, on the brink of death from starvation, has none. Is it truly morally wrong for that person to take food? Can it really be said that this person has done a bad thing, when it is in the pursuit of survival, and comes at the cost of no one? In Kant’s opinion, yes, this man has had a moral failing, and I therefore argue that Kant has changed the makeup of what morality is, inventing his own rules for what is ethical without regard for the thoughts and opinions of other people in different situations from his own. Kant seems to deny the possibility of alternate viewpoints, and that some situations are much more difficult to deal with morally than others, such as in the case of the greater

    Read More

  • Kant's Second Analogy

    4263 Words  | 9 Pages

    In the Second Analogy, Kant argues that we must presuppose, a priori, that each event is determined to occur by some preceding event in accordance with a causal law. Although there have been numerous interpretations of this argument, we have not been able to show that it is valid. In this paper, I develop my own interpretation of this argument. I borrow an insight offered by Robert Paul Wolff. In Kant's argument, our need to presuppose that the causal determination of each event rests not upon our need to impose a 'necessary' and 'irreversible' temporal order upon representations of the states of an object, as Kant is usually interpreted, but upon our need to generate a comprehensive representation that includes a certain a priori conception of events in the world around us. Although the argument I attribute to Kant is valid, it cannot compel the Humean skeptic to accept the necessity of presupposing the causal determination of each event: Kant has not successfully responded to Hume in the Second Analogy.

    Read More

  • Analysis of Immanuel Kant´s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals

    926 Words  | 2 Pages

    Overall Kant’s concepts of ‘The Good Will’ and ‘The Categorical Imperative’ can be applied to any situation. His ideas of moral law, good will, duty, maxims, and universal law all intertwine to support his belief. As a whole his concept enables the Kingdom of Ends, which is the desired result of the morality of humanity. Everyone is to treat everyone based upon true good will actions instead of personal gains, this way no one gets used. In all Kant trusts if this is achieved there will be universal peace across humanity.

    Read More

  • World Hunger And Utilitarianism

    1808 Words  | 4 Pages

    Kantians believe that we should avoid treating others as mere means.(877) In other words we should not make false promises, physically force a person to do what we want, use threats, or take advantage of someone’s desperate situation and make unjust offers.(877-878) These are examples of treating people as mere means because these people will not have the opportunity to make a reasonable choice for themselves. Either because they don’t have the complete information, their wellbeing is on the line, or simply because there is no just offer on the table. We are also to treat others as an end in themselves(878), meaning that we have to respect their autonomy, and their freedom to make choices for themselves. But according to O’Neil it’s not enough to treat others as an end in themselves. In her duty of beneficence she argues that we cannot treat others as end in themselves if they have limited rationality or autonomy (878-879). She derives her idea from Kant’s idea of imperfect duty which aims to promote helping others to reach their potential.(). Therefor based on these principles it makes sense for us to help reduce world famine, because the people affected by this issues are very venerable, and their autonomy is undermined. The only way to ensure that they are treated as rational human beings is if we helped them. It’s important to

    Read More

  • Kantian Perspective: Fairness And Justice Immanuel Kant Case Analysis

    1820 Words  | 4 Pages

    In chapter 11 The Kantian Perspective: Fairness and Justice Immanuel Kant suggests that the clear cut basic works upon the same technique as the ethical law and it is likewise disregarded by the individuals who accept who apply "double standards ". The downright basic may further be recognized as a prerequisite to not regard other objective creatures as means, for Kant communicates that every single reasonable being contain the capacity of pressing together objectives, yet never see themselves as just an intends to another reason for their moves are eventually made all alone benefit and are finishes in themselves. Immanuel Kant thought along these lines and was prone to the most splendid savant ever to have done as such. He remains maybe the

    Read More

  • Bernard Williams's Critique Of Kantian Moral Theory

    1104 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this paper, I will argue that Kant provides us with a plausible account of morality. To demonstrate that, I will initially offer a main criticism of Kantian moral theory, through explaining Bernard Williams’ charge against it. I will look at his indulgent of the Kantian theory, and then clarify whether I find it objectionable. The second part, I will try to defend Kant’s theory.

    Read More

  • Kant And Rule Utilitarianism Analysis

    909 Words  | 2 Pages

    So now that we have an understanding of Kantian ethics, let’s take that lens and look through it at the VW scandal. One of the key arbitrators of the scandal was the engineer that designed the cheat program, James Laing. You may believe that because VW 's will and duty align in creating the emissions test and Kantian theory doesn 't consider the consequences a factor did James and VW act wrongly? Looking through our hypothetical lens with a Kantian perspective the answer is a resounding yes they did act wrongly. Why VW and James acted wrongly comes from the mere means

    Read More

  • Case Study Of Kant's Deontology

    1113 Words  | 3 Pages

    Over the course of this essay, I will present the reader with information on Kant’s Deontology, including, but not limited to, explaining how Immanuel Kant discerns what is morally right and morally wrong. I will then apply these criterion to case number two, and attempt to accurately portray what Kant’s Deontology dictates is the morally correct response. Following this determination, I will show the reader that although Kant’s moral reasoning will lead us to a definitive answer, we should not be so quick to accept it. Interestingly enough, he seems to lead us to what would generally be the correct answer, but perhaps not in the given circumstance and not for the right reason.

    Read More

  • Case Analysis: Case Study: If Looks Could Kill

    1269 Words  | 3 Pages

    When applying Kant’s theory one also has to take into account the two aspects in determining what exactly the right thing in any situation is. They include universality and respect for persons. Universality states that you must “act only on that maxim which you can at the same time will to be a universal law”(Manias). Respect for person’s states that one must “act so that you treat humanity, weather in your own person or that of another; always as an end and never as a means only” (Manias). With this being said one must apply both of these to any option they are

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill's Case: Deontology Vs. Utilitarianism

    884 Words  | 2 Pages

    Everyone has duties to do things which are morally correct rather than to do things morally wrong or incorrect. Consequences are not the determinant whether an action is right or wrong but instead the action itself is the determinant whether it is right or wrong. Using the case as an example of this belief would be the fact that after shooting the intruder they are dead. No matter if they were intruding, the action itself was to grab the pistol and commit a violent act. Taking away any of the outside circumstances such as protecting your family, you still in fact murdered and killed someone. Kant’s theories recognize duties that are mostly prohibitions for example “do not lie, do not murder.” (Kant) By committing the murder in order to save your family you have now went against the deontologist rules that state do not murder. They believe in no intentional killings. Even if it does benefit the majority as a whole it is still not morally right in their theory. In Kant’s theory a killing is the action and the only exception to killing another being is if it was accidental or if you were defending yourself. Why this case is so tricky is because technically you were not defending yourself you were protecting your family because the intruder had no idea that you were in the house and also the killing is in no way accidental, because you intentionally grabbed the pistol to kill the intruder.

    Read More

  • Kant's Views on Morality

    961 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...osed to someone who helps feed the homeless. This example may seem extreme considering in today’s world both such acts would be considered good from the generalized moral compass in the world today. One would be right to a point to say that as Kant’s moral philosophy should not be considered as an excuse for people to not act morally. His way of looking at morality is a way to look at actions and motivations to be moral even in the worst possible scenarios. His view of highest moral order may be something that looks to be inaccessible but it is definitely something that people should operate by even when they become hopeless or as Kant puts it, “overclouded by the sorrows of his own”. The standard that Kant sets in his Groundwork of Metaphysics of Morals should be one that society follows when

    Read More

More about Kant Case Study

Open Document