lecture 5 kant Flashcards
you have only one obligation i ur life
the moral law
When u are obliged to respect the moral law , u are only then free
U are obliged to be free
If my only obligation to be free
My reason must be pure reason
Cardinal four duties
Cant lie, cant steal , cant kill ,cant betray
When u act in accordance to the concept the person becomes an end
true
Treat the other as u want them to treat u
Perfect symmetry because the pure concept is the same for me and for him; Friendship include honesty for everyone, so it is the same treatment
Why is life valuable
To practice the moral law
Function of moral law
sort out the permissable from the non permissable
it is not obligation to preserve ur life (it is not categorical imperative)
Because u have cases of sacrifice
Purpose of life
practice moral law for paradise
In kant, in our original nature we are moral and free
True
Killing is different from punishment kill
True
U dont kill whatever
true
Ethics is about actions that are permissable, there are no obligations on them
true
It is ethical duty not a moral duty to eat healthy (preserve ur body type)
True
Kant kind of meditation
ASking urself, was i moral and did i do things to improve myself….
In kant u are recommeded (not obligation) to cultivate urself
true
If our only obligation is the moral law, how then we have obligation to others property
the origin of right is the moral law
if u are exercising ur morality, being honest to ur friend; should i not allow u to practice morality
No, becauce i wll be infringing on his obligation; i will be not respecting the moral law. Implies consequence of moral law, i must respect people respecting the moral law
Anyone who is acting morally must be respected else i will not be respecting the moral law
true
why do i have to respect the freedom of the others because i will be respecting the moral law, else i will be immoral. Because the others are free when they are respecting the moral law, if i dont respect their application of moral law as if i am not being conceptually coherent as if i am not applying the moral law
true
When i am limiting my freedom to the moral law, i am not limiting it , totally opposite i am being free
true
Only when u willingly limit ur freedom , you are being free
true
There is no real freedom without the limit of freedom
true
origin of right: Willingly i limit my freedom because that is only how i will be free
true
Crime
not respect the freedom of the others ( I will be infringing on the moral laaw)
When someone is commiting a crime, should i go against h]is freedom
yes, because he is infrining the noral law and the only way to get him back to freedom is to go against his freedom; to get him back to the pure reason and intention of the application of the moral law
When u commit a crime , we go against ur freedom because by you commiting a crime you made yrself an exception . Thus we are making your exceptional act universal so bring u back to the real freedom. So when u kill we kill u because u thought ur act is really free but it was fake , so bring u back to the real freedom by making u wish ur action is universal thus killing u
u claim ur action is exceptional because in origin it is moral, so punishment is to make u wish that ur action is universal and hence it apply to u, and thus by that binging u back to freedom
It is a rational vindictive justice
Origin of right
respect the respect of the moral law , meaning respect the freedom of the others
origin of property
as long as u perform ur actions freely, meaning in conformity with the moral law, no one should interfere with ur freedom. So if u are in an island, and using a land freely (meaning abide the moral law) and this land was for no one originally. If anyone claimms this land he will be infringng ur freedom thus not respecting the moral law.
what make it ur property
U are 1st one using it
and people most respect ur freedom, so no one can use it else he wiil be infringing on ur rights
What makes ur car ur proopery
people must respect my freedom to use it else they will be infringing on my freedom and not respecting the moral law
by suspending the right of others on things they become private properties
right
property
right against persons when it come to things
Two condotions for property
the thing must be a usable thing by everybody
people respect my freedom to use it
are our bodies property
no because they are not usablr by everyone. Even myslef cant use myslef, (i cant make m self an end to an end which is not an ultimate end. ( i cant use myself for pleasure)
can other use me no, because i am end not a mean else they will not be behaving with me as a persona representing a moral category
u cant sell ur body or blood but u can donate
true ( it will be end not a mean for monry for example)
what is a contract
a contract is when u sign an agreement with somebody for an action in return for the perfomance of another action be the other party (mutual agreement on the performance of actions)
contract
agreement of 2 willing free persons to perform deeds. (They must be free, i cant put a gun into anothers head)
If i sign a contract for 100 kg of tomatoes to be delivered that doesnot mean i now own the tomatoes in ur garden
because the agreement of contract is to perform an action
If the tomatoes go rotten, it is not my fault
false it is, we agree to deliver the good tomatoes
U own the action to deliver the stuff
I cant break the contract because
1st i will be lying
second i am infringing ( i am making him doing actionthat he would not have done it with the contract) he would for example signed with another one and not wasted a day
An immoral action can be not a crime for example homosexuality, it is immoral but not a crime (I am not making the other do things against his will)
true
if i a make u do things based on a lie then it is a crime
true
Only case u can own someone is marriage
Sexual relations are necessarily animal, u are objectifying someone. Sex is about the physical properties. But u cant use someone as a thing for physical properties, however the species have to continue and people have sexual needs, u can do it under the condition tha sex is not an end itsel
Having sex can only be done by
making it not an end itself, so u are having sex with someone to honr him and serve him in totally (improve the spirit and preserve the body. Thus it will be under marriage, a mean under a higher end (to
Marriage
i commit myslef to serve u in everything .
whenever u have a sexual need , it is the obligation of the otherpartner because he commited himself (he signed a contract for all the needs including the sexual one.
u cant get ppolymarriage, because u are not allowing a person who has the duty to derve to servve u when required
immoral
against moral law (example not being loyal when polymarrying)
wrong
because u are infringing on his freedom to do his duty when u polymarry
u are not serving him for eternity
u will be using him
