Kantian Deontological Flashcards
What is the Kantian good will?
The source of moral worth - a good will is one that acts for the sake of duty
What are hypothetical imperatives?
Conditional ‘oughts’
If you want X then you should Y
‘if you want to make a cup of tea then you should boil a kettle’
What are categorical imperatives?
Unconditional ‘oughts’
You ought to do Y
‘You ought to keep your promises’
Have moral worth
What is the first test for a categorical imperative?
Contradiction in conception (can I conceive of it being a universal law?)
Contradiction in will (can I will it to be a universal law?)
E.g. False promises - cannot conceive of it being a universal law because no one would trust promises anymore
E.g. Not helping others - cannot will it because everyone will have been in a situation where they needed help, as a baby.
What is the second test for the categorical imperative?
The humanity formulation - Act in such a way that you treat humanity never as a means to your own end unless it is with their permission, such as a taxi driver.
What are the strengths of Kant’s system?
It places a central importance on human autonomy, it is not consequentialist and there is no singular end to pursue.
What are the issues of consequences for Kantian ethics?
In the case of the axeman the best option would be to lie but then we would be thinking about the consequence. It would be wrong to lie during the action because it doesn’t pass the first or second formulation because we cannot conceive of a world where everyone lies and we would be using the axeman as a means to our own ends
Why is the application of the categorical imperative a problem for Kantian ethics?
Because we cannot apply rules that we know are morally good. E.g. We cannot universalise ‘I will always donate to charity when I can afford to’ because if everyone did this then it would be a contradiction in conception because if everyone donated to charity then there would be no such thing as charity. However, this would be a morally good thing.
Why is the value of other motives and commitments an issue for Kantian ethics?
We cannot enjoy helping people because;
Two fathers
Visiting family in hospital without offending out of duty
Why are competing duties an issue for Kantian ethics?
E.g. Axeman scenario
We don’t know what maxim to choose over the other
What would a deontologist say about crime and punishment?
‘Whoever steals makes the property of everyone else insecure and therefore deprives himself of security in any possible property’
Stealing doesn’t pass categorical imperative tests
According to Kant, the state has the duty to punish accordingly - if you steal you get property taken away and if you murder you get killed
In order to retribute the criminal must be treated as an end in themselves - treat them like animals that are incapable of reasoning, do not hold them accountable but train them when they do something wrong.
What would a deontologist say about war?
Just as humans have a duty to leave the state of nature and enter a rightful condition, so do countries.
Torture should not be used because you cannot rationally will to fight a just war in a way as to make peace harder afterwards
What would a deontologist say about simulated killing?
We have to have respect for the autonomy of others
We are not violating the humanity formulation as actors consented to the role.
Other people have rights to be offended so they should not be shown in public where they cannot be avoided
However it can encourage us to treat people as a means to our own ends as simulated killing is a bad influence and can cause hostile behaviour
What would a deontologist say about the treatment of animals?
Humans can use reason to work out what we ought to do. Animals lack moral autonomy but we do not have to treat them as beings with their own ends (does not follow humanity formulation).
However we do have an imperfect duty not to be cruel to animals, as they do have rights not to be treated cruelly. Therefore we should avoid being deliberately cruel.
Animal experiments that are unnecessarily cruel are wrong but only because it may undermine the experimenters’ ability to treat other humans with appropriate respect
What would a deontologist say about the deception and telling of lies?
You cannot universalise the maxim of telling lies
In an affair you would be breaking the humanity formulation
In the case of the axeman you would have to tell the truth because of the humanity formulation
