3. Kant: strengths and weaknesses

Question 1

Key issues

Answer 1

• IS IT HELPFUL BECAUSE IT IS DEONTOLOGICAL
  
  • IS IT HELPFUL BECAUSE IT IS ABSOLUTE AND UNIVERSAL
  • IS IT HELPFUL BECAUSE IT IS COMPASSIONATE
  • IS IT HELPFUL BECAUSE IT IS BASED ON REASON/ APRIORI

Question 2

ST: Categorical imperative (absolute and universal)

Answer 2

The categorical imperative (which are commands that are good in themselves regardless of the consequences) are based on the formula of the laws of nature.
In which maxims can be established as universal laws. Kant said, “Act only on that maxim which you will that it become a universal law’.
Kant gives the example of a man who makes the maxim ‘When in need, I will borrow money and promise to repay it though I know this never will be done’. This maxim is not a categorical imperative is a contradiction in the law of nature because if it became a universal maxim it would nul the credibility of any promise, as Kant suggests, it would turn all promises of trust into ‘empty shams’

Question 3

ST: Kant’s walks? (absolute and universal)

Answer 3

• Kant took the same walk at precisely the same time each day in East Prussia. His walks symbolise the rigour and the exact nature of his philosophy. This means that he hated lack of precision, everything had to be structured and coherent. This shows that Kantian ethics is absolute and universal.

Question 4

ST: Duty (absolute and universal)

Answer 4

We act out of duty because there is an absolute moral law that we should know - a priori synthetic. If we use our reason then this should be become apparent to us and we can act as law making members of a kingdom of ends.
“So act as if you were a law-maker in a kingdom of ends”

• Duty is a helpful principle to have because we do ‘duty for duties sake’- not because of the consequences of an action which are often unpredictable.
  E.g. white lies. Kant teaches to tell the truth out of duty irrespective of the consequences which are unpredictable. Duty leads to the Good will - “good will shines forth like a precious jewel” and we achieve the summum Bonum where virtue and human happiness are combined.
  
  • Kant ‘ he does good not from inclination, but from duty”.

Question 5

strengths of the categorical imperative

Answer 5

→ prohibits acts which are commonly seen as wrong e.g. murder. The evidence of these common laws in different societies supports the truth of the categorical imperative.

→ Everyone can use the categorical imperative. It is not a system based upon belief in God but is based on the use of reason. Everyone has the ability to reason 

→ It provides moral objective guidelines (absolutes) which makes moral decision making much easier - no need for lengthy calculations as you might need in problems with agapeic calculation in Fletcher / the hedonic calculus in utilitarianism

Question 6

ST: Dostoevsky (absolute and universal)

Answer 6

In Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov,” - “If God is dead, then everything is permitted.”
This quotation highlights that if there is no God to provide a moral framework, then everything becomes permissible, and there is no basis for distinguishing right from wrong.

Question 7

ST: Thomas Hobbes (absolute and universal)

Answer 7

• Thomas Hobbes saw human nature as dangerous.THOMAS HOBBES: life is ‘SOLITARY, POOR, NASTY, BRUTISH, AND SHORT’ Human nature has to have some sort of moral framework as laws otherwise people would be far too destructive.

Question 8

ST: Aristotle (absolute and universal)

Answer 8

Nichomachean ethics - “that which is natural is unchangeable and has the same power everywhere just as fire burns both here and in Persia”
moral laws are absolute

Question 9

ST: Rachels (absolute and universal)

Answer 9

James Rachels “Moral reasons, if they are valid at all, are binding on all people at all times.”

Question 10

WE: Mackie (moral laws are not absolute and universal)

Answer 10

In his book Ethics: Inventing right and wrong Mackie states that each institution has an acceptable code of rules
Such as “do not break your promises ” (what can’t would call a categorical imperative ) -
Mackie argues that command not to break a promise here depends on the rules of the institution having been accepted in
the first place.
The rules are not absolute. They are accepted to varying degrees by all those within the institution.
they are not absolute but rather based on tradition and social expectation.

Question 11

WE: Protagorus (moral laws are not absolute and universal)

Answer 11

Protagoras ‘man is the measure of all things; the individual human being, rather than a god or an unchanging moral law, is the ultimate source of value.

Question 12

WE: Franz Boas (moral laws are not absolute and universal)

Answer 12

Franz Boas – cultural relativism quote (“all humans see the world through the lens of their own culture, and judge it according to their own culturally acquired norms”)

Question 13

WE: Darius Greek King (moral laws are not absolute and universal)

Answer 13

was offered money to adopt the Callation tradition of eating the dead- Darius refused as the Greeks burned the dead - Herodotus (historian).

Question 14

WE: William Graeme Sumner (moral laws are not absolute and universal)

Answer 14

Anthropologist who claimed that we are shaped by our ancestors- we inherit the traditions of our ancestors and this explains why values different from one culture to another.

Question 15

WE: normative cultural relativism (moral laws are not absolute and universal)

Answer 15

it’s not your beliefs but moral facts themselves that differ from culture to culture.

Question 16

WE: Schopenhaeur (moral laws are not absolute and universal)

Answer 16

Schopenhauer believed that Kant was too idealistic - and was not pragmatic enough at arriving at conclusions that work in the real world.

It is too absolute because…Kant states that “an ought implies a can” which may not necessarily be possible within reality.
E.g. “I ought to donate my money to charity” but this may not be possible to lack of funds

Question 17

WE: Satre (moral laws are not absolute and universal)

Answer 17

Jean Paul Sartre believed that no maxim can ever be universal

Question 18

WE: the categorical imperatives conflict!
W: Weak :

Answer 18

E.g a mother who witnessed an attack - she has a duty to her child and should not get involved but she also has a duty to act and save the victim. Conflict of duties here!

W: Weak
Kant argued that a conflict of duties is unconceivable as duties are universal and do not discriminate.
He says the duty to save a life is universal and we should not discriminate in order to save a loved one. We should act according to duty, not according to emotional ties or love!

Question 19

WE: Russel + Satre (moral laws are not absolute and universal)

Answer 19

The universe is just brute fact and there is no absolute moral good .

Question 20

WE: Ayer (moral laws are not absolute and universal)

Answer 20

Verificationist and Emotivist Ayer -
Moral statements of what is good and bad cannot be known and are not themselves true in any way - they are meaningless because they are not subject to cognition.
All moral statements are just an expression of a person’s belief - he calls
E.g to say ‘stealing is wrong;’ (which is a categorical imperative) is just saying ‘boo’ to stealing.

A.J Ayer and the Vienna Circle, a group of philosophical thinkers stated that in order for a statement to be meaningful, it must either be empirically verifiable or we must at least be able to conceive its method of verification, in principle.
Therefore it is meaningless to suggest that we can intuit good and bad because there is no empirical evidence to prove this is true.
Moral statements are not analytic or synthetic.

Question 21

W.WEAK to say (moral laws are not absolute and universal) - Vardy +Macintyre comeback to Ayer

Answer 21

E.g. Kant believed that there are universal moral laws which are created by God. He rejected the Divine Command Theory - God’s cannot be known through direct revelation but instead through human reason.
E.g. Macintyre supports Kant and states that emotivism (ignorance of absolute formulas) leads to people being treated as a means to an end

E.g. support from Peter Vardy emotivism reduces ethics to nothing more than ‘hot air’.

Furthermore - to state that all moral statements are just an expression of belief is weak as it justifies things such as the holocaust and therefore moral progress is void and there is never any reason to change anything within a culture.
Even Ayer changed his mind about emotivism when he saw the devastating consequences of Hitler’s ethical views

Question 22

W.weak to say that (moral laws are not absolute and universal) Rachel’s comeback to Mackie

Answer 22

The original observation of Cultural relativism suggests that cultures differ dramatically in their views of right and wrong.
E.g. a culture where it is wrong to eat cows - this societies values would seem very different to ours. Yet, in fact, this society does not eat cows because they believe that after death the souls of humans inhabit the bodies of animals. Therefore or our values do not differ that greatly - the difference lies elsewhere - the difference is in our belief systems, not moral laws.
‘We agree that we should not eat Grandma; we simply disagree about whether the cow is grandma’.
We cannot conclude, then, merely because customs differ, that there is a disagreement about moral law.

Rachels - There are some moral rules that all societies have in common, e.g truth telling and prohibition to murder - because these rules are necessary for society to exist

Question 23

Weak weakness of: Schopenhaeur (moral laws are not absolute and universal)

Answer 23

For Kant a person has to be free to act morally. For example if one doesn’t have the money to give to charity then one cannot act as a free agent and do one’s duty - so not necessary

Question 24

ST: explain how (it is deontelogical)

Answer 24

Kant emphasises the need for duty as a motive for all ethical decisions, he states it is important to do “duty for duties sake” suggesting that morality must only focus on the feature of an act, not its consequences.
This is helpful because it allows people to act according to the Good Will which is, according to Kant, intrinsically good and “shines forth like a precious jewel” therefore carrying out duty leads to moral acts.
Furthermore, acting in accordance with the Laws of ends in themselves means that people won’t be used as a means to an end - Kant say ‘Act as if to treat humanity in every case as an end, never as a means”- A moral maxim can only be accepted as a universal law (a categorical imperative) if it succeeds to do treat people in this manner.

Question 25

St - no need to predict (it is deontological)

Answer 25

the user doesn’t need to predict consequences which is difficult to do especially in moral decision-making.
For example, telling a white lie may seem the most moral thing and yet have hurtful, unpredictable consequences.

Question 26

WE: Bernard Williams (teleological is better!)

Answer 26

• Bernard Williams on Moral Luck
  An individual may think they are doing good and fulfilling their duty by doing x however the circumstances of their action may result in harm being done. Another person may do exactly the same action but the result is good and not harm.
  therefore it is never about the action - it is about the consequences!

Question 27

WE: Deontelogical is selfish (teleological is better)

Answer 27

YES IT IS DEONTELOGICAL

Kant emphasises the need for duty as a motive for all ethical decisions, he states it is important to do “duty for duties sake” suggesting that morality must only focus on the feature of an act, not its consequences.
This is helpful because it allows people to act according to the Good Will which is, according to Kant, intrinsically good and “shines forth like a precious jewel” therefore carrying out duty leads to moral acts.
Furthermore, acting in accordance with the Laws of ends in themselves means that people won’t be used as a means to an end - Kant say ‘Act as if to treat humanity in every case as an end, never as a means”- A moral maxim can only be accepted as a universal law (a categorical imperative) if it succeeds to do treat people in this manner.

-

Question 28

ST: no need to predict (nice and deontological)

Answer 28

No need to predict
Moreover, a deontological theory is helpful as the user doesn’t need to predict consequences which is difficult to do especially in moral decision-making.
For example, telling a white lie may seem the most moral thing and yet have hurtful, unpredictable consequences.

Question 29

WE: deontological is selfish (teleological is better)

Answer 29

there seems to be no rational consideration for morality, almost seems selfish.

The emotional outcome should be considered in order to make moral and compassionate decisions which benefits others, otherwise how can it be argued that the action is really moral? Kant’s reasoning for making moral decisions is contradictory.

Kant developed a philosophical theory known as transcendental idealism which means that concepts such as beauty or justice do exist and do have universal meaning and are created by God. Yet he rejected the Divine Command Theory

-morality cannot be known through direct revelation but instead through human reason which we all have capability to use.

Therefore, if we have the capacity to become moral autonomous individuals and discover moral laws, we should also consider the moral consequences of our actions as well as the intent. Surely, We have a “duty” to consider the consequences of our actions to avoid harm to others, referring to the second formula of law.

Question 30

WE: Bernard williams: (teleological is better)

Answer 30

Bernard Williams on Moral Luck
An individual may think they are doing good and fulfilling their duty by doing x however the circumstances of their action may result in harm being done. Another person may do exactly the same action but the result is good and not harm. Therefore it is the consequences that matter!

Question 31

ST: (Based on reason alone)

Answer 31

Kant distrusted emotions as being Unreliable and Phenomenal (from the world of experience)

Kant developed a philosophical theory known as transcendental idealism: Concepts such as beauty or justice do exist and have universal meaning.

Kant believed that there are universal moral laws which are created by God. Yet he rejected the Divine Command Theory - God’s cannot be known through direct revelation but instead through human reason.
* All humans have capacity to become moral creatures through using reason.
* Kant believed that his rules, if followed, allowed humans to discover the moral laws and become autonomous individuals.

Kant believed thar emotions should never become part of our decision making process. This is because he believes that they are unreliable because they are volatile and can make you irrational.

Question 32

ST kant on phenomenal world and nominal world(rational)

Answer 32

He believed that there was, in essence, two realities
– 1) the world of sense experience (phenomenal world) -
- 2) the world as it is without observation (noumenal world).
He believed that our ideas of the world came from the way that we perceive the universe around us
(what he called the phenomenal world which is shaped by our mental faculties and concepts).

The noumenal world is the world of things as they are in themselves, independent of our perceptions and understanding. In other words, it is the reality that exists beyond our human experience and senses, and we cannot have direct knowledge of it.

Therefore, there can only ever be an interpretation of the absolute because our own perception if always affecting us. Therefore we must use reason, a priori knowledge to reach absolute truth. Kant is saying that empiricism cannot give us accurate information about the world around us because we can never ‘sense’ the world as it REALLY is.

Question 33

ST: Heraclitus (based on reason)

Answer 33

‘you can never step into the same river twice’- The natural world is always changing

Question 34

ST: Descartes (based on reason)

Answer 34

Descartes was also a rationalist.

He says we cannot rely our senses because wax for example can be soft and pliable or solid - without reason we would think solid and melted wax are different properties and only through reason do we formulate an understanding of wax s a substance with different properties.

Question 35

ST: plato (based on reason)

Answer 35

cave analogy.

Question 36

WE: Need to consider the emotional outcome (it is weak to be based on reason alone)

Answer 36

It can lead to inflexible and rigid moral judgments that do not take into account the complexities of human experience.

Question 37

WE: Aristotle (deontelogical

Answer 37

teleologist -
Aristotle believed that cultivating virtues (courage, wisdom, justice and temperance) were essential for leading a fulfilling and virtuous life - not acting according to ‘duty’ as Kant argues

Question 38

WE: Fletcher (deontological)

Answer 38

‘the ends always justify the means, nothing else’ - 5th proposition

Question 39

WE: Dawkins (based on reason alone)

Answer 39

Dawkins would disagree with Kant - as he thinks that the mind cannot be broken up into separate entities such as emotions and reason.

Question 40

WE: reason is too varied (based on reason alone)

Answer 40

Furthermore, we can all use our reason to come to different conclusions - e.g. There are many different views on homosexuality. Therefore, we cannot argue that an action is morally right because we used our reason to decide it was as reason varies so greatly.

Question 41

ST: It is compassionate

Answer 41

• Kantian ethics emphasizes the worth of each human as an autonomous individual, with the freedom to act morally -
  e.g. (2) Formula of the end in itself we have a freedom and a duty to..
  ‘Act to treat humanity in every way and every time as an end, never as a means.’

Which is supported in the bible ‘treat others..’

There can be no conditional statements which means that the universal rules are not made with selfish intention.

In court a judge cannot have emotional ties to the defendant so it’s the same in ethics when we want to make the right decision.

Question 42

ST: Human equality and harmony are central features of Kantian ethics (it is compassionate)

Answer 42

E.g. Duty should not be based on emotional ties or love - therefore we should not discriminate to favour a love one - we should always act according to duty.
e.g. The summum bonum is the highest good and is the resolution of two different ends: good and well-being
e.g. Transcendental Taxonomy of duties categorised by Allen W. Wood
Duties to oneself
As a moral being
1. Against servility (acting in a manner that undervalues yourself)
2. Against lying

Duties to others
As a moral being :
To respect as individuals and equals

Question 43

ST: It emphasises the dignity of human life (compassionate)

Answer 43

Kant claims that the value of human beings is “beyond all price”, and all of us must try to further the interests of others and treat them with respect.

E.g. (1) The formula of the law of nature
‘Act only on that maxim which you will to become a universal law’
This means that suicide is not moral because it cannot be universalised.

E.g. the ultimate moral duty is someone who ‘longs for death and still preserves life without loving it - not from inclination or from fear but from duty’ Kant ‘Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals’
This is extreme duty as it is done at a cost to the self.

Question 44

ST: It is concerned with achieving the summun bonum (it is compassionate)

Answer 44

The “Summum Bonum” is a term in Kantian ethics that refers to the highest good or ultimate end of human life.
According to Kant, the highest good consists of two components: moral worthiness and happiness.
Moral worthiness refers to the moral character of an individual and is based on their adherence to the moral law, which is expressed through the categorical imperative.
Happiness, on the other hand, refers to the satisfaction of an individual’s desires and inclinations.
According to Kant, the ultimate goal of human life is to achieve the “Summum Bonum,”

However, he also acknowledged that achieving this goal is not easy, and may even be impossible to achieve in this life. This is because moral worthiness and happiness are often in conflict with each other, and it is difficult to achieve both simultaneously.

The only superntaural-being powerful enough to bring about Summum Bonum is God.
As Summum Bonum clearly does not happen in this life, God must bring it about in an after life. There has to be a Heaven with God in which all people are moral and happy.

Therefore Kantian ethics may seem cold as people have to temporarily sacrifice happiness by following duty, however the end goal of Kantian ethics is to achieve the SB.

Question 45

WE: Tillich (not compassionate)

Answer 45

Tillich “The law of love is the negation of law because it is the ultimate law”

not very good to neglect the safety of your child (mother who witnesses an attack) for the sake. of duty

Question 46

WE: Morality is often driven by emotions (not compassionate )

Answer 46

Morality is often driven by compassion- we feel sorry for the poor or compassion for the sick , or guilt when we act wrongly. Kant doesn’t stress this enough.

Question 47

WE: G.W.F Hegel (not compassionate)

Answer 47

G.W.F. Hegel argued that Kantian ethics provides no specific information about how people should act - the basis of his moral theory is solely a principle of non-contradiction -

Kant has no actual moral principles, he just provides guidance about how moral principles can be devised and justified.

Question 48

WE: Problem of compatibilitism -

Answer 48

This means that humans are both free and also bound by moral and physical laws - which is contradictory.
On the one hand - Kant is in favour of human autonomy (as before mentioned) yet he alos implies that one must obey the principles given in the categorical imperative

Question 49

WE: Fletcher - sacrifice necessary

Answer 49

sometimes its necessary to exploit people- Fletcher sinking ship/ boon trail - has to use someone as an ends to save lies - to ensure most love is served

Question 50

WE: It is not dignified (not compassionate)

Answer 50

It is sometimes possible to universalise statements that Kant would not justify.
For example he wrote that we cannot universalise suicide because it contradicts the nature of humans-to be alive.
However, one could have a categorical imperative that states “ Whenever the pain of suffering of existence is so extreme that it erodes good quality of life then suicide can be an option.”