ipl-logo

Comparing Kant's Categorical Imperative And Duties

1985 Words8 Pages

Categorical Imperative and Duties
Kant divides duties into two groups- duties towards others and duties towards self. They are further subdivided into strict and meritorious duties. Lets consider these duties one by one in light of Categorical Imperative.
Strict Duties to others : Consider a person is in need of money. He has no other option left except to borrow it from someone else. He ultimately borrows the money and promises to pay it back. Now, the question arises, should he keep his promise? Here the maxim is- when I am in difficulty, I will make a false promise. Is this right? According to Categorical Imperative, what would it be like if everyone started making false promises and it became a universal law? It would be a undesirable situation where the very notion of ‘promise’ would collapse. Therefore, it is a duty of every rational being not to make a lying promise. Such duties are called strict duties to others.
Strict Duties to self : A man is in a very miserable condition. He is sick of his life and does not want to live more. Can he take away his own life to get relieved? Here the maxim is- do you have a duty to keep your life going on even if it has become miserable? According …show more content…

Consequentialists differ from Deontologists on their insistence that when it comes to rightness or wrongness, the results of our actions are only things that matter. There are certain features of standard consequentialism: 1. While referring to the results or consequences of an action, consequentialists take into account the overall outcome which also includes the value of action itself. However, they are usually more interested in the consequences not only of people acting in a certain way but also of one 's refrainment from the action. 2. Standard consequentialism assumes that an action is right if and only if the agent could not have done better than

Show More
Related
1853 Words | 8 Pages

Under a consequential perspective, Commissioner Walker opines that as an official of the city he is ethically obligated to make decisions that promote good consequences for the greatest number. As he begins to deliberate on the case he starts to reflect on the two schools of thought. He first starts to ponder the meaning of consequentialism. He knows that consequentialism is the view that morality produces the right kinds of overall consequences.

Read More
1212 Words | 5 Pages

As we know consequentialism is the focus of an action that does more intrinsically good than bad, one kind of consequentialist theory is utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is an action that produces consequences that are more good over bad for everyone involved. In order to produce an action that is the best one a utilitarianist would consider both long and short term effects. Two sub categories of utilitarianism include act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. act utilitarianism bases an action on the overall well being produced by an individual.

Read More
636 Words | 3 Pages

Moral obligation carries a variety of meanings but it’s simply means a duty which one owns to another and needs to act upon it. “Brother’s keeper” was one famous speech created by Eugene Debs at Girard Kansas, 1908. Eugene Debs was an American political leader who was commonly known as a socialist. He focuses the pain that people have to endure and states that we should have the moral to help. Eugene Debs’s statement emphasizes collectivism and others have moral obligation to help others who are in need.

Read More
1565 Words | 7 Pages

Williams has an issue with the need to look at actions’ consequences to find any value in them. He believes that some actions have innate value regardless of their consequences. He compares the consequentialist’s position to that of a traveler who focuses only on the destination he is seeking to arrive at. Williams states that travelers don’t travel to arrive somewhere, they travel because they find value in the journey itself. There is something in this idea that can be applied to morality.

Read More
241 Words | 1 Pages

When a person is going to make a moral decision based on consequentialism, he or she first look at the good and bad possible consequences of the action, then determine whether the total good consequences outweigh the total bad.

Read More
1513 Words | 7 Pages

Consequentialist believe that morality is about producing the right overall consequences, and that the action brings about either happiness, freedom or survival of species. Utilitarianism is an example of consequentialism that maximizes utility (happiness). The difference between utilitarianism and consequentialism is that a utilitarian overlooks justice, as long as an utilitarian can maximize pleasure they would do whatever it takes. Consequentialist enjoy maximizing pleasure like a utilitarian, but they also take into account autonomy and justice. A consequentialist believes that determining good by measuring the outcome, if the good for all in the act is greater than the bad for all in the act, it is deemed morally good.

Read More
926 Words | 4 Pages

Considering ethical concerns within a culture is not of the same caliber as considering ethical concerns among cultures globally. Cultures are each diverse with rich history and customs of their own. This paper discusses cultural relativism by responding to four questions based on the topic. The ethical issues surrounding the process of paying traffic tickets in Mexico City and in the US are a focal point. What is cultural relativism, and how does the vision of ethics associated with it diverge from the traditional ethical theories?

Read More
541 Words | 3 Pages

Consequentialist or teleological theories of morality are based of the consequences of one's actions either pertaining to just themselves, or for both themselves and others. What’s great about this theory is that all the possible consequences, both good and bad are accessed, and are chosen based upon those thoughts. This theory applies a more realistic approach when it comes between the two being discussed because there more room for leniency and individual choice and interpretation upon what actions to take for different situations. Our human nature has us programmed to want the best for ourselves in the end of whatever position we are in. If there’s a path that leads us to an incentive, we are more then likely to take it.

Read More
512 Words | 3 Pages

Around the 19th century there was a philosopher that believed the all moral rules are absolute with each other. His name was Immanuel Kant, he argued that lying in every circumstance is immoral. He believed that moral obligations do not depend on whether you want to do something or not. He thought that we should follow all moral obligations, no matter what we feel about it. Kant’s argument on lying was that if we keep on lying, even if it is for a reason then no one would believe anyone.

Read More
728 Words | 3 Pages

Jieni Peng CA1 “What Makes Right Acts Right” by W.D Ross In the article “What Makes Right Acts Right” by W.D Ross, he debates the about idea of duties and how humans in general understand if their actions are correct. Ross mentions that humans do not deliberately execute their duties because of the consequences resulting from those duties. Rather, they perform those duties because of an innate form of common sense that humans possess inside of themselves. One example of this is the act of fulfilling a promise that an individual made to themselves or others not because of the end results but because of their sense of “duty.”

Read More
1222 Words | 5 Pages

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.

Read More
1374 Words | 6 Pages

Utilitarianism focuses on the consequences of an action. Deontological approaches focus on the morality of an action on an individual basis. Utilitarian approaches attempt to achieve the greatest good for the greatest amount of

Read More
1018 Words | 5 Pages

Example A skincare salesman who gets to know that the product of Company X that he is selling is actually good for skin at initial stage but causes burns after using it for a few weeks. As a consequentialist he will think about all the pros and cons of selling that product further but will eventually think that I get profit in selling these what happens to the skin of customers is none of my concern all I should do is sell as many products I can and that my role and my duty towards the company. He will think about all the consequences and then take a decision which will give him happiness at the end. Non Consequential Ethical theory

Read More
2393 Words | 10 Pages

Consequentialist theory followers. Consequentialist theory followers focus mostly on the consequences of the decision and the action. The most famous consequentialist theory is Utilitarianism. This theory follows the principle of utility which assumes that the decision is ethical if it maximizes benefits to the society and minimizes harms.

Read More
720 Words | 3 Pages

Consequentialism asserts that the ends justify the means or that if the results are good then the actions taken to obtain the result is irrelevant. In contrast, Deontology states that actions that are based on a moral code are moral even if their results are detrimental. The worst examples of ambition fall to closely to these two categories. The South Sea Bubble aligns with Consequentialism. Mccarthys direct actions against communism were based on a moral code however the entire situation was immoral.

Read More

More about Comparing Kant's Categorical Imperative And Duties

Related Topics

Open Document