Kantian Ethics Flashcards
What does Kant base his ethical theory on?
He bases morality on reason. Reason is universal. If ethics could be based on reason, a harmonious society of reason could emerge.
What is a Hypothetical Imperative?
A moral action someone does for an end other than duty. I.e. “if you donate to charity, you will feel better about yourself.”
What is the first formulation of the Categorical Imperative?
The test of universalisability. For example, a maxim that advocates stealing must be tested as if everyone were to steal. There would be no property left to steal, but society would be based on stealing - therefore, stealing is irrational and shouldn’t be manifested in our world.
What is the second formulation of the Categorical Imperative?
Always treat people as an ends, never as a means. Denying the value of another rational agent is akin to denying your own and it contradicts the fact that rational agents have their own ends.
What is the third formulation of the Categorical Imperative?
Kant argues that if everyone followed his ethical theories, we would live in a harmonious society - a “kingdom of ends.”
What is “good will” to Kant?
A “good will” is a will that does moral actions because they have used reason to figure out what their duty is: “duty for duty’s sake.” Someone who pushes aside their emotions and desires to fulfil their duty is someone with a good will.
What are the three postulates?
Three things we have to assume are true to base ethics off.
- God
- Immortality of the soul in an afterlife
- Free will. Without free will, ethics would be meaningless.
What is the “summum bonum” according to Kant?
Good people are sometimes punished in life, and bad people are rewarded. This is unjust, and there must be justice for ethics to work. Therefore, there must be a God who lets good people live in happiness after death.
This is the “summum bonum” - the highest good.
What is the issue of clashing duties?
We can use the criteria of categorical imperatives to reason what our duty must be. Kant says that anything you can’t do isn’t your duty. But what about when your duty applies to two tasks at the same time.
A soldier could universalise that his duty is to defend his country, but he could also universalise that his duty is to stay home and look after his sick mother. Both of these duties are equally valid, but clash.
How would Kant respond to the issue of clashing duties?
If we have clashing duties, we haven’t used our reason properly. He distinguishes between perfect duties that only have one way of being fulfilled, and imperfect duties that can be fulfilled multiple ways.
In the soldier analogy, the soldier could hire someone to look after his mum, or he could contribute to the war effort by working in industry domestically.
Are all universalisable maxims moral?
NO: Using the first formulation of the categorical imperative, someone who wants to steal could edit their maxim from “I can steal” to “someone with six letters in their name can steal.” That way, only a minority can steal so it won’t undermine the concept of property.
COUNTERPOINT: This is a misunderstanding of Kant’s theory because the maxim of their will would remain that they want to steal, regardless of conditions on the maxim.
Does Kantian Ethics ignore the value of human emotion?
YES: Williams says it is inhuman to suggest that emotions should be separate from decision-making. If you give money out of empathy, Kant would still regard that as a non-moral act.
Hume says it is impossible to act independent of emotion, so Kant’s theory only works theoretically, not in practice.
NO: Those who think it is morally good to donate to charity out of empathy imply that the goodness in the act relies on their emotional response. The needs of the charity recipient are not considered, only satisfying empathetic emotions in the giver.
Why is it a problem that Kantian Ethics disregards the consequences of an action?
Let’s take the example of a Nazi at the door, asking if we are hiding Jews and we are.
Kant would maintain that it is not moral to lie. If we lied, it would be like acting on behalf of the Nazi’s actions. We cannot control consequences so they shouldn’t be factored into our moral equations.
But this is a problem because we live in complex social spheres and we ARE responsible for others’ actions if we have bearing on them. Just because we can’t control consequences also doesn’t mean they are irrelevant.
How does Hume criticise Kantian Ethics?
- Moral judgements must be intrinsically motivating.
- Reason is not intrinsically motivating.
- Therefore, moral judgements are not made through reason alone.
“Reason is… the slave of the passions.”
How does Kantian Ethics link into Kant’s social upbringing?
He calls homosexuality an “unmentionable vice”, suggesting that his reasoned views were actually a reflection of his time.
