Kant's Views On War Analysis

653 Words3 Pages

the breakdown of an event that has multiple possible outcomes. It includes the actor, the nature of the act and actor, the act itself, the context of the act and relationships within the act, and the outcome of the act. The actor represents virtue or motive. The nature of the act and actor represents natural law. The act itself represents principle or deontological ethics, or the regulating position that evaluates the decency of an action based on the action’s observance to the laws. Laws are given their particulars from rights. Rights also shape the system of governments. Rights are used in the legal system. Rights also form the organization of morality as it is observed. Rights carry moral power. Rights are not privileges, but rights are entitlements. I believe that Kant’s ideas are comprehensive enough to understand all the dimensions of ethics, especially this topic of war. I don’t think it is solely our rationality that clothes us in dignity. An irrational or insane person could believe they are dignified, but they could not have dignity. The fundamental moral issue at stake in war is respect for persons and respect for human …show more content…

These four ideas are important in determining how one person respects another and the dignity or character of oneself. My position on the issue of war relates to my conception of human dignity; for instance, if a nation like America views a nation like Iraq only as a hub for terrorists looking to harm Americans than the majority of Americans would want to prevent major harm on themselves by going to war. Dignity is a virtue, just like integrity, properties that are inherently “good”, or a person doing “good”. A person should not be dignified by the worst their country has to offer because there are bad people in every nation, just like there are good people in every nation. It is important to not take away dignity from others or respect from