Groundwork for the metaphysic of morals is Kant’s first major work in ethics which was published in 1785. Morality applies to all rational beings. Morals actions is defined as one which is determined by reason and not by our emotions. The moral worth of an action is determined by the reason or motive behind it and not by its consequences. The motive behind any action should be worthy of turning into a universally applicable maxim. Morality should be universal as reason is the same for all times and people.
Kant calls it categorical imperative that we must act in such a way that the maxim can be an universal law. In contrast, He mentions hypothetical imperative, which suggests we act to achieve certain results. Hypothetical imperative has a maxim: “do such-and-such if you want to achieve such-and-such result.” According to Kant, there is no ifs in moral action.
Acting morally requires
…show more content…
One with free will can act and also decide whether to act in a given way. This act of deliberation separates an autonomous will from a heteronomous will. We act according to our own dictated laws and not according to our passion or impulse. We can act on autonomous will even if we follow as universal law or maxim as those laws are rationally reflected.
Criticism:
It Doesn’t Acknowledge the Role of Emotion
Kant believes that an action should be based on a sense of duty rather than emotional feelings.
Many contemporary moral theorists criticize Kant for failing to give proper due to emotions. Kant's support for pure reasoning implies that personal relationships with friends and family--which are forms of emotional attachments--are not important for morality. So, if my mother and a complete stranger is drowning Kant cannot explain why I’d want to save my mother, and whether it would proper to do so.
It Doesn’t Fit With Our Intuitions
There are aspects of Kant’s theory that fall clearly outside of our ‘moral