In Imanuel Kant’s, “What is Enlightenment” he opens his essay with the phrase, “man’s release from his self-incurred tutelage.” This phrase is referring to man’s dependency on others to make decisions for him. Mankind is not courageous enough to take their own responsibility for their own actions or decisions, so they rely on other people to do it for them. Failure is what makes people scared of making their own decisions, and when they do make a mistake it is easier to have someone to blame it on. Having others do and think for you requires no effort, and more times than not these “guardians” of one’s life do not want to let go of their control.
I believe Beth’s decision to end her life is morally justified, despite the reservations her family might have. In this case, we will look at two aspects which would support Beth’s decision: a maxim turned Categorical Imperative in Kantian ethics, and the principle of autonomy. In Kantian ethics, the consequences of an action are irrelevant, only the intentions behind one’s actions can be judged to be morally right or wrong. The reason behind one’s actions can be based on one’s maxim, furthermore, “if they pass the test imposed by the categorical Imperative, then we can say that such actions are right” (479).
Kant expresses his belief that there is a hypothetical and categorical imperative. Hypothetical imperatives are rules of skill, and are usually framed in the sense of cause and effect. For instance, if you want something then you need to take whatever actions are necessary to get it. Let’s say that you want an apple from a tree. If you want to get an apple from a tree you have to to the tree, figure out a way to get to the apple and pick it off.
To get a better understanding of Kant, his categorical imperative and Formula of Universal Law, let’s examine a scenario. A young women (under 18) forgets to use precaution during sex and ultimately ends up being pregnant. She goes to the hospital and aborts her fetus just because she is too young to have a child. Did the woman do the right thing? Kant would say no here.
The final ethical theory is Kant’s deontology. Immanuel Kant was a German philosopher who admire the stoics for their dedication to performing their duties and playing their part. He based his theory on duties, obligations, and rights. Its main focus is that everyone has an inherited right. It highlights the importance of respecting a person autonomy.
In addition, Kant says that the hypothetical imperative has the relationships between means and ends. Insofar as a human has adapted to an end, he is committed to adopting the means. For the same instance, a person has the end of doing well at the school. The ideal way is to think that what he should do or not do in order to achieve it. If he wants to be well at the school, going to the parties every night is a mistake for him.
Kantian ethics is based on the belief that actions should be to fulfill our duty, and not be determined by the consequences of our actions (Kantian Ethics, n.d.). Kantians believe an action should be one that one could will that everyone would act on and that it respects the goals of others and not use them as a means to an end. One example of Kant that I find difficult to understand is that lying is always morally wrong. The example of the murderer at the door is often used to dismiss this theory of ethics. If a murderer knocks on your door asking about the whereabouts of his victim, it is wrong to lie.
(1) Reason as a faulty The explanation of in what sense the reason is a faculty is required a bit elucidation with other faculties in human’s mind. Kant himself divided the mind’s power into three basic faculties: cognition or knowledge, feeling, desire. Wood reads the Kant’s version of three faculty as those powers that are working together. This is most obvious when the faculty of desire operates as mental process.
To conclude this essay, it is evident that this kind of debate can never truly be solved. We can however see that it is clear that Kant’s categorical imperative can certainly be applied to Freud’s Superego section of the self, because both of these concepts influence the self to do the best possible thing in every situation and to try to live in a way that minimises harm. While Kant’s categorical imperative seems to be rather idealistic, it is a genuinely good way to want to conduct your life. By living in the way you ought to behave and wanting people to do the same, is a good way to live, but sadly it will never be truly possible because of the injustices and unfairness in the world. People seem to allow their Superegos to become overridden
Immanuel Kant is the philosopher that develops the idea of the Categorical Imperative. Kant said that only forms of action and principles, why those actions were performed, are very important but not actions by themselves and their results. The Categorical Imperative theory applies to everyone and there are two formulation of this theory. The first one states that there are the rules that everyone needs to follow and there are no exceptions to it. The other formulation states that we should treat all people equally and respect their rights.
The Enlightenment was a powerful movement that used reason as a weapon to triumph over ignorance and advance liberty. In reading about notable enlightenment thinkers the theme “Dare to think” seemed to embody the values of the enlightenment. The concise statement “dare to think” is not just a statement, the very essence of the words embodies the enlighten. The first word in the statement “dare” implies breaking a norm that has enormous power behind it.
Ethics and the search for a good moral foundation first drew me into the world of philosophy. It is agreed that the two most important Ethical views are from the world’s two most renowned ethical philosophers Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. In this paper, I will explore be analyzing Mill’s Greatest Happiness Principle and Kant’s Categorical Imperative. In particular, I want to discuss which principle provides a better guideline for making moral decisions. And which for practical purposes ought to be taught to individuals.
Q.2 How and why does Rachels modify Kants categorical imperative? Are there any problems with this modification? Immanuel Kant uses the categorical imperative as a means of living. Imperative meaning a command and categorical meaning a necessary in itself with reference to nothing else , defines it as something which is mandatory to do or follow in all situations. An example would be if a thief broke into your house and demanded you to tell him where your most prized jewels are, acoording to kant and the categorical imperative, you must tell the thief the truth, you cannot lie as it breaks the moral rule “thou shalt not lie.”
Introduction 1. The book Critique of Pure Reason tells us about the short comings in understanding the concept of metaphysics and the requirement to change the same. The author Immanuel Kant, has tried to highlight that metaphysics can be changed through epistemology. He suggested that human knowledge contributes substantially to the way an object emerges to us in experience. He mentioned that all objects a human mind can think of conform to the manner of thought even before experiencing them practically.
Kant believes that it is the responsibility of every human being to think rational. Rational human beings do deeds that are fair to everyone. If one’s decision could harm anyone regardless of the person view point, one should not commit that deed, which includes being fair to the prey as well as the predator. Although Russ is a hardworking sports editor it is not fair that he receives more hours than the rest of the employees.
