Issues Flashcards
issues
list
clashing/ competing duties
not all non universaliable maxims are immoral and not all universaliable maxims are moral
the moral value consequences
the value of certain motives such as love friendship kindness
morality is a system of hypothetical not categorical imperatives
contradicting duties
where do maxim go and what weight is attached?
perfect duty not to lie but imperfect duty to care for others.
perfect- no exceptions
imperfect- sometimes this gives us some direction
eg axe murder
however this is a serious issue because his moral system relies on consistency, if we cant then they arent duties.
competing imperfect duties
These are duties we don’t have to follow all of the time; we are praised for following them but unlike perfect duties, we are not always blamed for not following them.
Seems to leave us with a very vague moral duty.
We need more guidance example: when I should help people, and how much self-improvement I should undertake etc.
Having an imperfect duty alone doesn’t seem to tell us when to perform the imperfect duties, knowing which duties to prioritise can be difficult and sometimes these duties seem to compete.
we have a perfect duty to treat everyone as an end in themselves
issues- universalising maxims and morality
link between universalizable/non universalizable maxims and morality isn’t clear.
- not all universalizable maxims are moral
2. Not all non-universalizable maxims are immoral.
Not all universalizable maxims are moral.
Many trivial acts, which don’t seem to be moral, can be successfully universalised.
- Example I will chew food 32 times before eating to aid digestion.
- Kant’s ethics only tell us what we can’t do it doesn’t give a positive account of what we should be aiming for.
- As a strength It allows people to pursue their own projects and ends.
Are all non-universalizable maxims immoral?
Something odd can happen when we try to universalise maxims that include relatives or norm-related positions comparing ourselves to others.
- Example: taking an exam
Maxim- I will try to come in the top half.
This seems reasonable, yet a world where this is a law is impossible to conceive as we can’t all by definition be in the top half. This would mean we have a perfect duty not to try to come in the top half nor the bottom 50% too
Issues- trivial duties
Categorical imperatives seem to generate travail duties.
- Many examples of Kant’s perfect duties involve acting in a way that would undermine a social/ cultural institution that the act relies on such as promising. The institution is trick or treat which don’t seem to be a moral one.
Issues- the moral value of consequences
Key objective of Kantian ethics- place all the moral worth on the motives of an action.
eg axeman
- The moral value of the act lying or not seems to reside in the consequences not the motive.
focus on self following rules but there are others who are not
Issues- consequentialist?
Criticised for having consequentialist tendencies while claiming to be purely motive based
Some suggest that to work out whether a maxim can be consistently willed relies on thinking through the consequences of having this as a law- and so is consequentialist.
However, in Kant’s defence the moral values lies in the consistency of the will and not the in whether the world be good or bad if the maxim were universalised.
Issues- the value of certain motives such as love, friendship, kindness
Example- father a/b
Most would argue that father a is better because they want to, but Kant argues that father b’s actions have moral worth as they are carried by duty and not desire. Seems counter-intuitive
Kant these actions though in accordance with duty are not done for the sake of duty and so have no moral value.
Issues: friendship
Some object Kant’s approach, claiming it encouraged a cold and calculative approach to ethics by demanding that we put aside our feelings for the suffering of others.
Kant is not against people wanting to do right actions and positive emotions but he is clear that acting only from desire and not duty has no moral worth.
Issues: we can’t adopt an impersonal perspective
Some doubt whether it is possible for us to set aside the interest concerns and desires that make us individuals and to think of ourselves as purely rational autonomous beings engaged in universal law-making.
