Lecture 3 Flashcards
Kant
Question 1: Explain the moral law given one example , you do it by imagination and by concept and u show me why only the conceptual way is good
the moral law states that Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the
same time will that it become a universal law. For example if we take steal, if we consider that every one will steal implies there will remain no property to own which is flase, on the other hand if we consider stealing is allowed, if a person steal, it is not stealing it is taking, which contradicts stealing, thus it cant be moral because it leads to conceptual incoherence thus it is immoral.
Question number 2: explain coherence of the concept of duty
Answer: for coherence of concept of duty u need to have pure practical reason (deduce an action from coherence of the concept ) on the ground of the moral law (meaning whatever ur maxim is , if it can become universal it becomes a moral action), with the existence of persons (In order to perform the action , u need someone to represent the person which is the conceptual persona which is another reasonable persona, that is why we can apply it to animals because they are not person they dont have practical reasoning) motivated by paradise (unearthly pleasure else u will have conceptual miscoherence
Question 3
Explain how kant was able to deduce the moral law and what are the implications of such deduction
Because of practical reasons there must be a law that explain all the should and shouldnots.The law must abstract what is common about all particulars (Should and should not), the form of the law must be in categorical imperatives
2-fuction of the law, (the law conform to the the categorical imperatives)
3- The law then , all the particular have to conform to the universal
It has an empty form. Thus the moral law is eternal The moral law imposes in the particulars to be universal, this is why morality is eternal.Morality must hold all the time,forever and for everyone. No evolution in morality unlike scientific laws
Question 4 , u must explain the antonomy of reason ( reason tell u have to act morallly and at the same time u dont have a motivation to act morally ) and how this postulation will lead to the postulation of paradise and immortality of the soul
U have to act morally but there is no motivation to act morally (it is just conceptual coherence). Reason at the same time tells u action requires motivation. if this motivation was earthly ,no action will be moral. There must be unearthly pleasure else it will lead conceptual incoherence, which means immortality of the soul.OR U CANT ACT MORALLY
Kant says there is a fact of ought
We know people say you should and should not (fact of ought), that doesnt mean ought of a fact people still lie
Kant want to explain the necssitation of the will (the should and should not
Kant says the only source to explain that is because we have reason, and the fact that reason (deduce conclusion from premise) can be practical
Given some premises u are going to infer a conclusion that will determine ur will
Kant says you behave on pure practical reason that is why u can necessitate ur will
for conceptual coherence. u dont look at consequences.
Pure practical reasoning is determining ur will basded on conceptual reasoning not on measuing consequences
true
Determination of ur will means
What do i want
imperical determinations : i want food, knowledge (u desire them, they dont tell u what to do)
pure determination of the will : i want conceptual coherence
when ur will want conceptual coherence , u have good will
true, kant says pure practical reasons target role is determine a good will
In practical philosophy, u shouldnt use ur reason to calculate consequences but u should use ur reason to deternmine a pure will (good will,conceptual coherence)
true
When u have moral law , u can now sort the permissable and non permissable actions
true
In order to do the moral action what do u need ( to say the truth, to hoor u parents….)
U need another person, because u relate to urself as reasonable person and this relation to urself as reasonable person must be the ground to ur relation with another person, else action cant be moral or immoral ( when u say i want to be honest with my friend, the friend i am referring to is the ideal conceptual friend, thus i will behave with the friend in front of me in the same way)
To be moral u have to be actively moral, u need to act the same way, it is inside u. Morality is active.
thus u cant be moral with ur cat, building
Why would someone endure pain for the sake of conceptual coherence, there is contradicction, kant says
If i say want conceptual coherence, why i want conceptual coherence, because i want conceptual coherence. Implies there is something more which is the motivatiion.
What do i want is conceptual coherence (pure intention pure determination of the will)
Why do i want motivation paradise (it must be unearthly pleasure, else my will will not be goood)
Motivation is not the determination of the will
why do i want to apply the moral law (motivation in kant is unearthly pleasure)
Antonomy of practical reason
The practical reason oblige you to be morally active, however the practical reason tells u there must be a motivation, not only for the sake of conceptual coherence I