Kantians believe that the rightness or wrongness of an action does not depend on the consequences, but on whether they fulfill a duty. They must act in a way that will produce the greatest overall amount of good in the world. In this view there is no obligation to give money to a homeless person, but it is the right thing to do. Kant’s supreme moral principle is the categorical imperative. The categorical imperative is a moral law that is unconditional for all agents because of intrinsic value.
Kantian Ethical theory is described and dictated solely based on logic at which no conditions can apply. The Theory is formulated on two categorical imperatives in which the first formulation is,” Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become universal law.” And the second formulation is,” Act so that you treat humanity
In Kantian terms, there lies a set of moral principles that is universal and continues to apply to all humankind no matter the context or situation. In the minds of someone who believes in this ethical theory, their decision is always motivated by goodwill and that end never justifies the means, it is all about duty. A person who stands with the supreme court decision and is in favor of banning abortion across all states is someone who believes in the kantian ethics
Kant’s theories believed that human beings have moral values
Kant also thought it was possible for pure reason to discover objective ethical truths. Kant believed that ethical truths must be categorical, universal, and be the product of reason. Kant’s categorical imperative states that a person should always act in such a way that they could will that act should be a universal law. This means that Kant thought that it was best to do the right thing, even if the person didn’t want to. This view of ethics focuses on what is right to do.
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.
Kids are usually confronted with various challenges and obstacles in their growth, which are the worrying burdens for most parents. These curious guardians tend to have impulses to closely monitor their children's lives and have been notoriously known as 'helicopter parents'. To these nervous mums, dolls which record their conversations with the kids may be in heated demands. Yet, parents should never eavesdrop on their children. While the monitoring might satisfy their gratification of controlling, however, from a utilitarian mindset, the monitoring would ultimately undermine parent-child trust and cause the backfire of such implementation.
For Kant, his ethics are grounded on reason and pure reason alone. It is a matter of a priori vs a posteriori. A priori is knowing the truth of the judgement, regardless of empirical view. An example of a priori would be that a single
Even though it is true that taking the life of another is not right, it is even truer that the punishment should fit the crime. The death penalty is an exercise of justice that promotes retribution for crime and moral punishment for those who choose to take human life. Also, it prevents society 's worse offenders from re-offending, and it provides justice for the victims whose lives were cut short without a second thought. To better understand why capital punishment is a justifiable act, Kant 's theory gives a clear and logical understanding of the eye for an eye approach. Additionally the utilitarian view also explains why capital punishment is justifiable in regards to comfort for the victim 's family and prevention of re-offending.
In 2002, Magnus Gäfgen abducted the eleven year old Jakob von Metzler, the son of a prominent Frankfurt banker (Harvard University, 2011). When the kidnapper was captured by the police, he refused to tell where he had hidden the boy, leading the deputy police chief Wolfgang Daschner to threaten Gäfgen with tortue (Harvard University, 2011). In the midst of the media hysteria a question of morality emerged: was the threat of torture justified in trying to save the boy's life? Whereas utilitarian ethics would assert that the threat is justified if saving the innocent boy's life maximizes overall utility; Kant’s deontological theory of absolute ends dictates respect for the criminal’s human dignity regardless of his crime (Sandel, 2009). This
They base the rightness or wrongness of a specific action depending on the action’s adherence to a rule. Where the “right” thing to do is to make a decision that can be universalized to the masses. The overarching point that Kantians believe is to never make an exception for yourself. Furthermore, they can determine the rightness of an action based on five steps. First, state what act you are considering doing and why you want to do it.
“Retribution” or “Retributive justice” can be defined as “a theory of justice that considers punishment, if proportionate, to be the best response to crime.” (Wikipedia, 2016) Peter Koritansky, philosopher and author made a distinction between two views on retributive punishment in his work entitled “Two theories of retributive punishment: Immanuel Kant and Thomas Aquinas” in 2005 in which he believed that the Thomistic understanding of retribution is superior to that of Kant and this write-up is going to outline the reasons as to why he think this is the case. To illustrate this, it is vital therefore that we understand the Kantian retributivism and Aquinas’s understanding of punishment. Firstly the Kantian retributivism or the theory of retributive by Immanuel Kant suggests that punishment in the form of coercion of force is necessary to establish justice and to punish criminals, he emphasized that “Punishment by a court…can never be inflicted merely as a means to promote some other good for the criminal himself or for civil society, but that it must always be inflicted upon him for the fact that he has committed a crime”
Moral theories are theories that help us distinguish between a right or a wrong action. Adequate moral theories help us understand that what we should or shouldn’t do in certain situations. Two of the most famous moral theories are Utilitarianism and Kantianism. According to Utilitarianism, an action is right if only if it out of all the other action gives out the maximum utility. In oppose to that, Kantianism says that an action is right if and only if, in performing that action, the person does not treat anyone as a mean and treats everyone as an end in itself.
Bribery is defined on the dictionary as offering, giving, or receiving of a bribe, which means giving or receiving of something of value in exchange of specific favorable outcome that it may not occur if it weren’t for the bribe. “Bribery law consists of the criminal rules for dealing with people who attempt to buy influence with public officials and other decision-makers.” (Bribery and Corruption Law). The crime of bribery covers a broad scope of wrongful conduct, for instances, bribes of cash, favors, assets, services, or anything else of value, whether delivered presently or in the future. Bribes can occur directly, or indirectly through third parties in order to disguise the transaction.
Immanuel Kant has the concept of finding the core answer of a certain category. To look for the equation to move forward when you are involved or part of a project. It requires applying the concept of the categorical imperative. Moreover, Immanuel Kant moral theory would be actions are morally right in virtue of your motives that derive from a person’s needs or from his/her inclination. For example, right action is defined as morally precise to those individual with
