ipl-logo

Rationality In Kant's Categorical Imperative

1193 Words5 Pages

First and foremost, the modern human is an individual. He is not an organic part of the society, but a basic independent unit of knowledge. Human’s most important feature is reason. Rationality is what distincts us and makes us a human being. In his theory of moral Kant puts aside emotions and disregards human body. According to Kant rationality is the basic need of human being.

Kantianism is a part of deontological ethics and is always in contrast of utilitarianism, which emphasizes the consequences. In Kant’s perspective actions are approved or disapproved in and by themselves. Peoples’ rights should never be violated, even if it brings good consequences. Kant discovers hidden principles that govern our beliefs. According to Kant the only …show more content…

They don’t disappear. This is the obligation that is immediate and understood by all rationale creatures.

There are three formulations of the Categorical Imperative:

1. "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction."
2. “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.”
3. “Therefore, every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends.”

I would like to concentrate on the first one, which is “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction.” To understand whether any act is moral we need to use the above formulation using guidelines. We have to state the maxim and apply the formulation mentioned before (will that it becomes a universal law), which means asking yourself a question “What if everyone was doing the same”. If it leads to a logical contradiction, it fails the test and is not morally permissible. This could be supported by the Plato’s law of

Show More
Related
1090 Words | 5 Pages

In Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant does not presume to establish moral laws; he posits the basis for moral law itself. Through this process, Kant introduces the opposing concepts of heteronomy, laws provided externally for the individual, and autonomy, laws established via the application of reason. The implication arises that autonomy under Kant's definition is freedom, and that autonomy is a requisite for moral actions. To fully develop an understanding of this relationship it is crucial to deconstruct and integrate his notions of: will, duty, maxim, and imperative. Humans have the unique ability to perceive natural law, and imagine or will those forces to be different.

Read More
967 Words | 4 Pages

Peter Singer in his famous paper “Famine, Affluence and Morality” begins with assumptions “The suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad” also he gives his second assumption that “if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it”. Singer gives an application of his principle, by ”the drowning child in the pond” case. Imagine you are walking past a pond and you see a little toddler drowning in the shallow pond, you have 2 options now: first- you can pull out he child and save him, however you will ruin your favorite expensive shoes.

Read More
732 Words | 3 Pages

The contrasting beliefs voiced by Martin Luther King Jr. and Socrates emphasize the logical flaws in following established principles and opposing unjust laws in the pursuit of justice. King believed that it is our responsibility as individuals to interpret the law in a manner that takes into account its moral justness (King 94). Conversely, Socrates thought that as members of society, the norms and regulations we had lived by our entire lives should not be disobeyed under any circumstances (Plato 49b). In this paper, I side with King's point of view and reinforce his reasoning by arguing that any law or principle can be broken provided the individual can morally justify their actions. Ultimately, rules provide stability in our society, however

Read More
1075 Words | 5 Pages

”(Lewis, Page 3). In this he states this law as the Moral Law, also called the law of right behavior. I interpret what

Read More
1365 Words | 6 Pages

we neglect our own perfection. While there are additional duties that make us better moral persons, it is difficult to analyze them under C1 or C2 because of the uniqueness of these duties which focus on improving our capacity to act dutifully. Given that there are no duties to self derivable from C1 alone in the Doctrines of Virtues, when we turn to a discussion of duties to others we face even more complications. All the duties of love (and likewise benevolence) are loosely derived from C1. While we might consider other’ ends, we may not give practical assistance to others, such as neighbor who is in bad circumstance.

Read More
453 Words | 2 Pages

Kant’s being of the categorical imperative with its three formulations, and Mill’s principle of utility. Both of their principles are incorporated with a kind of universality; Kant’s case that of restricting one’s rules of action to those that one can will to be a universal law of nature, and Mill’s case considering the consequences of a type of actions for humans and creatures. The two of them have a two-stage conception of moral thinking: a critical stage and an application stage. Their proposed ‘duties to others’ correspond with one another by being not to lie, to be beneficent, not to steal, and not to deprive others of

Read More
495 Words | 2 Pages

Kant’s Categorical Imperative How does lying violate Kant’s formulation? When a person tells a lie it is often seen as being dishonest and, in some cases, can affect the most important quality in a human, which is the ability to make their own choices. Therefore, with each lie a person tells contradicts a part of them that gives that person a moral worth. For instance, if I was to tell a lie and it lead a person to a decision that they would have otherwise not have chosen, had they known the truth, I would have harmed that person’s human dignity and autonomy. The person doing the lying only robs others of their choices.

Read More
166 Words | 1 Pages

In closing, Kant makes for a wide range on what can be termed as an absolute moral duty, with his argument of the principle of universalizability and the principle of humanity. Kant argument shows that I should do things whether I want to do so or not. “With the results [being] that if [I] ignore or disobey them, [I] [am] acting contrary to reason (i.e. irrationally),” (FE, 168). Being a rational being is something that human beings are able to achieve. With Kant argument, we can only determine if an action is right or wrong once we know its maxim.

Read More
154 Words | 1 Pages

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.

Read More
7327 Words | 30 Pages

This knowledge represents the features of the moral law (freedom from inclination, human dignity, the kingdom of ends, etc.) to us as morally valuable, which value inspires our assent to adopting morality per se as our end as though we were that way inclined, but does not emotively pull us toward the particular actions it recommends. In “Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View”, Kant describes a kind of self-deception by which we undertake to behave as though we were morally inclined (151). He says that this self-deception, although counterfeit, is necessary and is meant to “lead man to virtue” (152). “Force accomplishes nothing in the struggle against sensuality in the inclination; instead we must outwit these inclinations” (152) – in the absence of true moral character, we can still achieve morality’s demands by pretending that we are moral. This recalls the picture of the swimmer, who, in the moment of leaping into the frigid water, behaves as though her inclinations were different in that moment from what they in fact are.

Read More
1039 Words | 5 Pages

The categorical imperative means: when you want to do something if you always think I'm doing is good for all mankind. So we must behave as we enter the Categorical Imperative, only then will we be real people, autonomous and free. Kantian ethics is included within the ethical duty to self that can justify and support the moral correctness of an action in their good consequences. Instead of the consequences,

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
10714 Words | 43 Pages

Topic:- The Critical Study of Kant’s Doctrine of Right. Introduction: What is Right? A right is the sovereignty to act without the permission of others.

Read More
2127 Words | 9 Pages

There are many reasons why we may rightly sequester or even incarcerate people whom we believe to be dangerous to others in society even though we do not think that they are morally culpable for their actions. 2 Kantian moral philosophy is premised on the capacity of rational beings for pure practical reason is proved to be a fruitful foundation on which to base critical analysis of psychological srinence. Kant first points out that if we take nature to be the totality of things insofar as they can be objects of our senses, then the doctrine of nature will contain two parts corresponding to the two forms of our sensibility: a doctrine of body and a doctrine of mind. But an "historical doctrine of nature comprising nothing but systematically ordered facts" (i.e., classificatory and descriptive natural history) must be distinguished from natural science

Read More
871 Words | 4 Pages

Immanuel Kant’s moral theory differs greatly from the other theories we have learned about, especially Mill’s view of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is based on the consequences of actions, while Kantian Ethics focuses on the intentions a person has before they act, and if they are fulfilling their duty as a person when acting. Kant explains his theory by providing examples of different people who are all doing the same action, but for different reasons. He discusses a store owner who charges everyone equal prices and explains that this only has moral worth if he is acting from duty, meaning he does this because it is what is right. The act is not moral if he acts in accordance with duty, or because he is worried about his reputation or business.

Read More

More about Rationality In Kant's Categorical Imperative

Related Topics

Open Document