KANT ISSUES- Consquences

Question 1

What is a criticism of kantian ethics

Answer 1

Puts all moral worth on the motives of an action

Question 2

Explain the case of the axeman and how the moral value of the act resides in the consequences

Answer 2

For Kant it would be wrong to lie as you cannot conceive a world where this is the moral law.
However by telling the truth there will be bad consequences and this is what makes it wrong, not whether you can universalise the maxim underlying the act.
In this scenario the moral value of the act (lying or not) seems to reside in the consequence not the motive.

Question 3

What is Kants response

Answer 3

That consequences are not in our control
If we divert the murderer but we unwilling assist him because our friend is somewhere else
Kant argues we are doing the right thing and the axeman is at fault
We should make sure that we are acting on the maxims that have been worked out to be universal laws
If we all do that we all have freedom and autonomy

Question 4

What is the response to Kants response

Answer 4

While in the example I maybe doing the right thing the axeman is not and this could have dangerous consequences.
The focus on being consistent misses the consequentialist picture
Kantian ethics are more concerned with being rationally consistent with our actions then whether our friend is killed

Question 5

What is another criticism of Kant

Answer 5

Having consequentialist tendencies while claiming to be purely motive based.
When working out if a maxim can be consistently willed relies on thinking of the consequences of the maxim being a moral law therefore is consequentialist
In Kants defence the moral value relies on the consistency of the will not whether the world would be good or bad if the maxim was universalised