ipl-logo

Moral Philosophy: Crusius And Kant

5639 Words23 Pages

Before Kant, moral philosophy was dominated by Crusius’s sense of divine morality which stipulates that the will of a person has to be in accordance with the will of God. Wolff’s notion of moral perfection adds that we should strive to procedurally achieve our sense of moral obligation to the degree that the ends or effects of a particular action are based on our ability to calculate perfection. Kant concludes that Wolff’s postulates are virtually impossible in attempting perfection in 1764 in his Prize Essay ,‘‘now I can with little effort show how I became convinced, after much thought, that the rule ‘do the most perfect action which for you is possible’. ’’ (Prize Essay.2:229) Crusius and Wolff’s arguments essentially appeal to the un-provable …show more content…

Kant at various places says that the formulas of the CI are equivalent, but he also often treats them as separate principles (referring to my third chapter).CI1 and CI2 are equivalent in a sense that CI1 plus a rational requirement to treat one’s own humanity as an end in itself entails CI2. However, CI1 and CI2 (as I understand it) could be separate principles. By itself, CI1 does not specify the standards of rational willing that determine whether a person could accept a moral principle or not, it basically requires us to act in ways that are justifiable to others. CI2 is a principle requiring humanity in oneself and others to be treated as an end in itself, which would be the Kant’s intention of moral content to refute the emptiness …show more content…

Critiques of Kantian moral philosophy on the basis of emptiness come from a variety of thinkers and from many different schools of thought. For example, Mill claims the universal law permits commonly immoral behavior and can only become consistent by resorting to Utilitarianism. ‘‘All he shows is that the consequences of their universal adoption would be such as no one would choose to incur’’ (Mill.Uti.162). Mill criticizes Kant for failing to identify ‘‘the actual duties of morality’’ (Mill.Uti.162). Mill’s critique derives from the Introduction of Utilitarianism, where he makes the claim that Kantian ethics, and all a priori abstract concept of ethics, derive from first principles (Kant’s the CI) that go unstated, leaving an actual description of action as elusive, and thus the prescriptive ethical determinations derived from the CI unable to inform action (Mill,

Show More
Related
1022 Words | 5 Pages

Kant emphasizes that only the law and pure respect for the law should determine the will. However, when taken in context with his other remarks in the Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, it is unclear how the law can be anything other than arbitrary. Kant claims that results do not matter as it is the will that determines morality. This means that no matter the law, following it is the moral thing to do. This raises significant problems.

Read More
1215 Words | 5 Pages

When we consider Kant, it appears to be evident that almost all who are acquainted with his compositions recall the single word "obligation”. On the case of Mill, we often relate his works to that of “utility”. Both of these philosophers debate on whether our moral code is subjective or objective and what we ought to do in situations that lead us into a two-way path. What if this path has us caught between lying to a murderer or allowing them into our homes only for the reason of homicide? In the “Murderer at the Door” thought experiment, we are caught between Kant and Mill, our two-way path, and deciding whether it would be morally right to invite the murderer in the house or lie to save the life of the victim.

Read More
588 Words | 3 Pages

Immanuel Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals focuses on how rational beings argue common sense morality through the definition and execution of various moral philosophically facets such as: good will, reason, duty, and moral law. Good will aids in regulating the actions of all rational beings trying to act upon something. All good will is intrinsically good without limitations, yet not every action is acted with this in mind therefore not everything is good. With the exception of good will Kant explained things that these gifts such as wealth, power, and honor (goods of fortune) wit, understanding, and judgement (goods of nature), to name a few, are good with qualifications. Because, not all gifts are entirely good and desirable as they can be become evil and harmful when they lack good will and intentions.

Read More
407 Words | 2 Pages

How do moral decisions differ from other kinds of decision? In general, how does a moral x differ from a non-moral x, whatever x may be? In this article, I examine an exegetical controversy regarding Kant 's theory of Morality which centers on this well-known topic. My enquiry will provide a fresh point of moral decision for the nature of the moral value.

Read More
966 Words | 4 Pages

In The Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785), the great Western thinker Immanuel Kant outlines some of his thoughts on some of the most fundamental of moral concepts, laying the groundwork for many future philosophers and students of ethics. Kant's ideas are, however, fairly challenging, both to modern-day readers of his works and to the thinkers of Kant's time that relied on contemporary utilitarian and hedonistic theories, or on objective good lists. Kant refutes these theories by promoting the examiniation of the act, rather than the consequences of the act, or the intentions behind it. Kant's sterile rejection of consequential pleasure, pain, or any motivation to do good in determining the moral worth of an act is controversial.

Read More
981 Words | 4 Pages

According to Sandel’s lecture, which type of moral reasoning, does Mill’s utilitarianism use? According to Mill the principle of utility means realizing a consequence of something before you do it,whether your intentions are good or bad. What Mill means by utilitarianism is giving the greatest hapiness to the greatest number of people. According to Sandel 's lecture Mill 's utilitarianism uses consequentialist reasoning.

Read More
913 Words | 4 Pages

A deed that is morally good is called the “right action”. In this paper, I argue that Kant’s method for distinguishing “right action” is better than Mill’s view because Mill’s view is based on the consequences of the action, whereas Kant defines “right action” by its motives. English Philosopher, John Stuart Mill, emphasized utilitarianism. The concept is that “the purpose of morality is to make life better by increasing the amount of good things in the world and decreasing the amount of bad things” (Nathanson). By following this concept, we understand that the “right action” is determined only by its consequence and nothing prior.

Read More
381 Words | 2 Pages

“Kant's criticisms of utilitarianism have become famous enough to warrant some separate discussion. Utilitarian moral theories evaluate the moral worth of action on the basis of happiness that is produced by an action.” “The utilitarian theories are driven by the merely contingent inclination in humans for pleasure and happiness, not by the universal moral law dictated by reason.” “His ethical theory has been as influential as, if not more influential than, his work in epistemology and metaphysics. Most of Kant's work on ethics is presented in two works.

Read More
695 Words | 3 Pages

For Kant, Morality is based on choice, or autonomy. If someone has the right of an autonomous will, they act based upon an action because it is simply desirable. In Contrast, Utilitarian’s believe that morality should be centered on what will bring the greatest happiness. I aim to demonstrate that Kant is right in his proposal on morality and autonomy by understanding and recognizing the flaws in the Utilitarian concept, and lastly addressing why Kant’s approach is more preferable. Before I address why Kant’s views on morality and the human autonomy is more preferable, it is important to understand what is being said on the Utilitarian’s terms.

Read More
4425 Words | 18 Pages

As a formal principle, the Kantian moral law provides the necessary path to moral action. However, all of the debates on emptiness emerge, around these questions of how the Categorical Imperative could reach the moral conduct, whether one can will a candidate maxim as a universal law without this generating a contra¬diction through CI1, or how moral law commands respect for rational agents as ends in themselves through CI2. There have

Read More
1777 Words | 8 Pages

The age old question of what is moral has lingered in Philosopher’s minds for ages. In order to answer this question, we must know what morality is, and define exactly that. Humans are diverse sentient beings, and having the same morals uniformly is impossible, however when we look at theories that philosophers have proposed, there is a vast amount of speculation as to what makes anything moral. In this essay, I will be deconstructing the ideas of morality and John Stuart Mill’s theory of utilitarianism, helping me by opening opportunities to critique his arguments and concepts. Morality is the concept of what is right and what is wrong.

Read More
1774 Words | 8 Pages

In Kant's Groundwork of Metaphysics of Morals he states that nothing in the world could be qualified as good except the good will. The good will gives us the will do the right thing inevitably ending in good. The only way actions can really be moral is if they are motivated by good will, morals are a part of us being rational beings. Leading onto reason, we use our reason to try to do good and follow our duties. By using our knowledge, experience and reason we can form an opinion which can help us do our duty.

Read More
1524 Words | 7 Pages

Kant: Obviously I don’t expect individuals to follow these ethical rules to a tee. In fact, it is very difficult for us humans to follow these. However, in an ideal world, we’d only act such that we’d hope others act towards us, and this theory would produce moral laws that we can use all the time. Lynch:

Read More
160 Words | 1 Pages

Kant’s various philosophical works and their contents are highly debated, and remain relevant in today’s society. As Kant’s discussion suggests, all humans the ability to follow the good will because of their ability to reason. However, one can suggest that some people are more inclined to follow the good will due to their individual traits. Kant proposes the categorical imperative that allows everyone to evaluate if their actions uphold the good will. Regardless of one’s position in the argument, it is apparent that moral law is applicable to all humans as rational beings, and therefore should be followed by all who possess the ability to reason.

Read More
841 Words | 4 Pages

Yet, the constructivist view of Kantian ethics may present a contradiction: if morality is entirely constructed by human rationality, then there should not be a universal principle which one would need “to receive” in order to regulate decisions. Thus, as Kant rejects authority and experience, through reason and textual analysis, drawing both from Kant’s writing and Augustine’s City of God, it is imperative to reconcile the conflict between the realist—that morality exists independent of rationality—and constructivist readings of Kant’s ethics. That “in practical common reason, when it cultivates itself, a dialectic inadvertently unfolds [...] and one is therefore [unable] to find rest anywhere but in a complete critique of our reason” lends credence a constructivist

Read More

More about Moral Philosophy: Crusius And Kant

Related Topics

Open Document