Categorical Imperative Theory: A Case Study

996 Words4 Pages

Before I discuss the theories, I would like to point out the Jean 's important actions that will be analyze to determine whether he acts justly. The first point to realize is that Jean acted based on his self interest of saving his friend. Second, Jean broke laws by hacking into the Pharmacy 's security. Third, Jean lied (arguable) to the pharmacist. Fourth, Jean made the pharmacist break rules by giving Jean medication that he would otherwise not give if he knew the truth. Those are the four points that will be analyzed to evaluate Jean 's action.

Kantianism:
About:
Kantianism uses a unique principle of duty rather than measurement. In Kantianism, a person act purely because of a universal moral rule that is based on the Categorical Imperative. This action is done regardless of the consequences afterward because duty is more important. To determine what rules are valid, the Categorical Imperative has two important checks: the rules must be universally applicable, meaning anyone can do follow it and it will not change due to certain circumstances; and that the rules must never make other people use people purely for the purpose of achieving his or her goals. If a rule passes those checks, it is valid and must be follow.

Analyze:
While there is no real list of …show more content…

Every action must fill the major of people with happiness or satisfaction regardless of one 's personal desire. Because Act Utilitarianism is about making each action worthwhile, the actor must evaluate the action each time he or she acts. However, there is a chance of moral luck: the chance of acting in good intent, but an uncalculated mishap happened, causing the opposite outcome. Act Utilitarianism followers would say even if a person act in good intent, but an unexpected event happen to create a devastating outcome, the person did not act