Kantian ethics Flashcards
Kant’s Deontological Theory on Duty
Immanuel Kant looked at moral statements and how we use them. His deontological theory looks at how an action brings about a duty as opposed to utilitarianism, which is consequence-focussed.
The importance of reason
Kant felt reason played a big part in how humans make moral decisions. So he centred his theory on the idea of reasoning from goodwill and duty.
Moral vs everyday statements
Kant thought moral statements were different from everyday statements.
Moral statements are a priori synthetic as they can be understood without any experience, but followed up and evidenced with experience.
Everyday statements are most typically known through a person’s experience and then verified by the experience of that person using this evidence to support the statement.
Kant’s theory on good will
Kant focussed on the idea of goodwill and its relationship with duty.
Kant thought that an action would only be a good action if the person acted from good will.
For example, an action would not be deemed good if it was done to make somebody feel or look good.
Kant’s definition of duty
Duty is to act morally and follow the rules that have been set out for you. When you combine good will and duty, you get a moral action.
Kant’s former statements on reason come into play here. Kant felt every decision should be made by reason; based on the good will and the duty you have.
A decision should not be based on feelings or personal opinions. It should simply be based upon reasoning conforming to goodwill and duty.
Hypothetical Imperatives
Hypothetical imperatives are dependent on the aims of a person’s wants and needs.
Hypothetical imperatives are goal centred and are only used when someone is trying to reach a goal.
Hypothetical imperatives begin with ‘if’.
E.g. if you want to be healthier, you should exercise more and eat healthier food.
Categorical Imperatives
The categorical imperative is a moral imperative.
Categorical imperatives are used alongside rules and laws and instruct people on what is right and what is wrong.
Categorical imperatives can be applied to everybody and can be used to make decisions on what is morally correct.
3 formulations
Kant devised three formulations to the categorical imperative to make it clear how it should be used and how somebody should apply it to making a decision.
The universal principle - First formulation
You must perform actions that can be made into a universal rule that can be applied to everyone (universalisability).
Example: you cannot lie. This is universalisable as it is wrong to lie and lying can cause many issues. It is also not acting out of goodwill.
Ends in themselves -Second formulation
Kant said: “treat people as an end in themselves”. You should not treat somebody as a means to an end. You should treat them as an end, treat them as you want to be treated.
Kant means that every person is good, intrinsically. He states that we should all treat each other as an end, never use someone to achieve something else. He felt it was never right to treat somebody as a means. We should be using good will to decide our actions and treat others with kindness.
The principle of the kingdom of ends-Third formulation
Our own actions should be judged based on the idea that everyone else in the world is acting morally and treating everybody fairly. Therefore, treating people as an end, not a means.
This formulation clearly rejects hypothetical imperatives and focuses on the idea that all humans have a moral duty and it is their role to perform it.
Using the three formulations
These three formulations can be used like a checklist to decide whether an action is a categorical or hypothetical imperative.
Kant said we should be striving for categorical imperatives at all times to focus on our moral duty. We should not be wasting time on selfish deeds or performing actions just to receive a reward.
True categorical imperatives
Kant argued that a true categorical imperative is performed simply because it is the right thing to do. A bonus is that you might feel good after performing it.
But a categorical imperative is not performed for the reward; it is simply a product of a moral duty.
How to achieve summum bonum
If you act morally, you can achieve summum bonum - supreme good.
Kant uses it throughout his deontological approach to mean the highest happiness.
The summum bonum is received after we die and is a reward for acting morally and following the duty you have been given through following the categorical imperative.
It is therefore quite often compared to Heaven.
Must be acting for goodness
To receive the summum bonum, you need to follow the categorical imperative and follow your innate duty.
You must be acting for goodness, not for selfish reasons or to gain something else.
Kant argued you cannot attain the summum bonum if you are simply acting morally to reach it. You must be acting out of good will, not just to attain a goal.
The three postulates
The three postulates can explain to an individual why they should act morally as being moral is rational. They are sometimes names the postulates of practical reason.
Freedom
You must act autonomously - of your own accord.
Therefore, an individual must be able to access freedom and have freedom of choice to act as they wish.
If they do not have this ability, they cannot achieve the summum bonum. This is because somebody must be acting according to their own duty, using their own thoughts and actions.
Immortality
To receive the ultimate end goal, summum bonum, we must accept that there is an afterlife and that we have an immortal soul.
If we felt that we only existed in the life we have now, then the summum bonum would not be possible.
Therefore, to use the categorical imperative correctly and achieve the summum bonum, we must accept the fact that the soul is immortal and that there is something for us after we die - the summum bonum - heaven.
God
Kant argues that moral law is evidence to prove God’s existence.
He goes on to say that there is only one being that could reward those that follow the categorical imperative - God.
This is because God is omniscient (all-knowing), omnibenevolent (all-loving) and omnipotent (all-powerful).
Therefore, if you believe in the first two postulates, then you must believe in the fact that God exists.
Is Kantian Ethics Useful for Making Moral Decisions? Arguments for
It makes clear what being moral is and how we should make moral decisions.
The categorical imperative uses three formulations which indicate what a person should check before they make a decision.
Kant emphasises autonomy and freedom in his deontology, which also promotes the value of others and respecting them for who they are.
Additionally, Kant’s theory promotes moral actions and rejects immoral actions, such as slavery and torture. The theory promotes equality and fair treatment.
Is Kantian Ethics Useful for Making Moral Decisions? Arguments against
While Kant’s morality is based upon reason and seems straightforward, he doesn’t give specific advice on individual situations which can make it difficult to apply.
Additionally, it can be too prescriptive. While Kant says he feels human freedom and autonomy are important, he also states you must adhere to the categorical imperative to be a moral being. This can be quite confusing and contradictory.
Can duty really measure bad/good?
Thomas Nagel says that Kant’s theory ignores the situation that the person is in when they are making this decision, so this ignores the circumstances that the moral action is being performed in.
So one person may think that by following their duty, they are doing the morally right thing. But in the circumstances, this may not be the correct thing to do.
As Kant’s theory ignores the particular situation, someone might do their duty and it be wrong; another person might do their duty and it be right.
Is Kantian ethics too abstract?
Kant’s theory is quite abstract which makes it difficult to apply to certain situations.
It explains how to reach a categorical imperative using three formulations and accepting three postulates - but it does not tell you which actions are morally acceptable, which makes it difficult then to know what to do in situations.
Are duty and God too abstract?
Focus on duty can make it difficult to apply to modern situations as we do not necessarily follow this idea of ‘duty’ in modern society.
Kant’s theory uses the idea of God as the reward of the summum bonum, which would make the theory abstract and inaccessible to Atheists.
Too reliant on reason?
You could argue that the focus on reason and duty in Kant’s deontology removes any understanding towards other humans and makes the theory cold and inhumane in certain circumstances.
Kant seems to reject personal relationships and promotes following the categorical imperative above anything else.
Theory lacks empathy
Ignores the consequences of actions and focuses purely on duty and reason makes the theory lack empathy to a certain degree. It also makes it difficult to apply the theory in real-life terms.
Humans are very emotional and we cannot innately ignore other people’s feelings or ignore relationships that we have when making decisions. It goes against our nature.
So Kant’s theory is too reliant on reason. This means the theory is difficult to apply and use in modern-day life.
Enlightenment thinkers
Enlightenment thinkers like Kant wanted to solve the problem that those of different faiths could never come to agreement. Religious warfare had been greatly destructive in Europe. Kant’s solution was to base religion and ethics on reason, not faith. Reason is universal in that everyone has it, but not everyone shares the same faith. If ethics could be based on reason, Kant conceived a more harmonious society would follow. There would at least be the hope of coming to agreement through rational discussion.
