Comparing Kant's Approach To The Enlightenment Or The Age Of Reason

The Enlightenment, or The Age of Reason, was an age of new ideas that brought great change to the west. One area that had to be rethought was that of morality and ethics. People had to begin to justify morality without using religion or Aristotle’s idea of telos. John Locke approaches this topic by saying that morality is grounded in rights that all humans have by virtue of being human, and David Hume believes that morality is grounded in sentiments. Immanuel Kant had a much different approach. Kant grew up in Prussia with a Lutheran family. Martin Luther’s impact can easily be seen throughout Kant’s works. Luther created the ideas of faith alone, scripture alone, and the priesthood of all believers in Treatise on Christian Liberty. Although Luther’s influence is evident throughout Kant’s work, The Fundamental Principles of Metaphysics and Morals, there are a few fundamental differences. The Fundamental Principles of Metaphysics and Morals depicts Kant’s justification of morality. He begins by presenting the idea that a person’s actions can only have moral worth if they are preceded by good will. Kant believes that a person’s motivation matters much more than the consequences. Also, he writes that every human being has the capability to understand the moral law through a sense of duty. He thinks there is only

Kant believes that all humans have a sense of duty and that people would not do good things unless there was this universal motivation. Kant describes duty as “… the necessity of an action, resulting from respect for the law” (186). In a similar way, Luther believed in the idea of the priesthood of all believers. This is the idea that all Christians are equally able to read and understand the Bible. This idea promoted egalitarianism and individualism in society. Kant and Luther both believed that each person can understand certain things