Kantian Ethics Flashcards
What did KANT believe in KANTAIN ETHICS
believed there were ABSOLUTE MORAL RULES that could be WORKED OUT RATIONALLY - apply in All Situations
ABSOLOUTIST THEORY, unlike others it Doesn’t Directly Rely Upon Belief in God
DEONTOLOGICAL , Right Actions»_space; outcomes
What does Kant believe about Duty?
Duty is the ACTION that’s MORALLY REQUIRED
we RATIONALLY WORK OUT that we ought to do. Our emotions and possible consequences.
Our DUTY to PUT GOOD WILL into ACTION
What does Kant believe about Good Will?
- ONLY TRUELY INSTRINSICALLY GOOD THING is Good Will - having Good Intentions
- said “ good will Shines like a Precious Jewel “
- argues it Doesn’t Matter if were Prevented from Carrying out Our Intentions; what Matter is that we AIM to do the RIGHT THING - this good will is the Desire to do “ DUTY FOR DUTY’S SAKE “
What is the Name of the 2 IMPERATIVES we follow to Rationally CONSIDER what is GOOD or NOT
HYPOTHTICAL IMPERATIVE
CATEGORCIAL IMPERATIVE
What is the HYPOTHETICAL Imperative
Kant’s 1st Imperative
- Command Followed to ACHIEVE END RESULT
- Teleological
- IF Commands , e.g. dont eat cake If you want to lose weight
What is the CATEGORICAL Imperative
Kant’s 2nd Try at an Imperative
- LOGICALLY Has to be FOLLOWED , GOOD in itself REGARLESS Of CONSEQUENCES
- No If’s , ABSOULTE
- e.g. Don’t Kill - Our Duty to Act on Anything that’s Categorical
3 MAXIMS - Tests
What are the 3 MAXIMS which TEST WHETHER our ACTIONS are CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVES
- UNIVERSAL LAW
- PERSON AS ENDS
- KINGDOM OF ENDS
Explain the MAXIM - UNIVERSAL LAW
- when Considering An Action we should Ask Ourselves, ‘would it be logical for this action to be universal; WOULD it MAKE SENSE if EVERYONE DID THIS?
- e.g. You WOULDNT UNIVERSALISE STEALING , if we did, it would Be Chaotic and Ilogical, No One would Own Anything that’s actually there’s.
Something that Would be Logical to Universalise is Occasional Donation to Charity
What is a WEAKNESS to the Maxim - UNIVERSAL LAW
- LYING Shouldn’t be Universal Law but SOMETIMES it Can Be JUSTIFIED e.g. to Protect Someone
- Universal Rules AREN’T MUCH USE in a World where EVERY SITUATION is DIFFERENT. If no situation is the same, morality should be relativist not absoultist
Explain the MAXIM - PERSON AS ENDS
- believes Humans being are Rational and Autonmous.
This means WE HAVE a DUTY to TREAT EACHOTHERS as PERSONS (as ‘ends’ in themselves) and NOT as an OBJECT ( as a Means to an end), Using Them to Achieve a Purpose - e.g. GF Breaks Up with You, but You Want Them Back, you Begin to Date New Girl, to Make Original Jealous, in doing so, You’re Treating that Girl as an Object, not a Person
What is a WEAKNESS to the Maxim - PERSON AS ENDS
In LIFE, you have to USE PEOPLE to ACHIEVE THINGS anyway, we Don’t Specifically Treat Others as an Object with our Only Purpose to Achieve - e.g. we Use our Teachers to Help us In Education
Explain the MAXIM - KINGDOM OF ENDS
- the FINAL TEST, almost COMBINATION of the OTHER 2
- asks us to Imagine we’re Part of the Law-Making Council in a Hypothetical K of E where Everyone Always Treats Others as An End
- E.g. If Someone Hits You, it May be Legally Acceptable to Hit them Back, However, Kant’s K of E asks you to Act Based on How Society Ought to Be, Rather than How it is
What is a WEAKNESS of the Maxim - KINGDOM OF ENDS
Everyone would Feel like They’re in Charge of the Law, which Creates a LAWLESS SOCIETY
What is the Point of All the Maxims?
So we can Test Whether our Actions are Categorical Imperatives so we can ACHIEVE the SUMMUM BONUM (the Supreme Good)
What are the 3 POSTULATES
- FREEDOM - that WE HAVE FREE WILL
- IMMORTALITY - there’s an AFTERLIFE , WE’RE IMMORTAL
- GOD - that GOD EXISTS
