Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was a German philosopher.
His work has had a profound impact on various fields, including ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, and aesthetics.
It is a deontological ethical theory, meaning that it focuses on the inherent nature of actions rather than their consequences.
Kantian ethics is grounded in the belief that morality is derived from rational principles and the application of the categorical imperative.
KANT’S DEONTOLOGY
The morality of an action is based on rules which are also called ‘Duty’.
Acc. to Kant, your actions are of moral worth only if it coincide with your duties and duties should be performed for their own sake.
Kant believed that ethical actions should be the result of following universal moral laws such as doesn’t lie, don’t cheat etc. People should follow these rules and do their duty.
Duty and Obligation:
- Kant believes that moral duties are objective and binding on all rational beings. These duties arise from the rational nature of individuals and are not contingent on personal preferences. Moral obligations must be fulfilled for the sake of duty itself.
Morality is constant according to Kant. He made a distinction between two kinds of acts:
The things we ought to do morally The acts we do without any moral reason, law
IMPERATIVE
an imperative is a command that considers action as a means of accomplishing any purpose.
Two types of imperative
hypothetical and categorical
hypothetical imperative
stand for a set of rules/ commands/instructions that tells us what to do if we want to achieve something.
For instance, if one wants to get rich, the hypothetical imperative would tell her to get a job or work hard.
Categorical imperative
Categorical Imperatives are our moral obligations and they need to be followed irrespective of whatever the situation is.
According to Kant, it doesn’t matter whether you want to be moral or not, you have to follow the commands of Categorical Imperatives. They are independent of your wishes and desires.
He gave three maxims of this imperative, the first one says:
- “Act only on that maxim which you can will as a universal law.”
stands for universalizability, your acts, and the nature of your acts should be universally applied. the term Maxim stands for rule or principle whereas the term universal moral law stands for acts that must always be done in similar situations.
Moral Rules apply to anybody and everybody.
goodwill is pure devotion to moral law.
the second maxim of Kant focuses on how human beings should be treated.
2.“Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a mere means.”
For Kant, we use objects and things as mere means all the time.
Kant never said that we don’t use each other as means. We all are human beings and we are dependent on each other, we rely on each other. but shouldn’t be using each other as mere means.
Kant thought that human beings as rational beings are capable of making their own decisions, setting their own goals, and guiding their conduct by reason. They perform actions from a sense of duty.
3."Act according to maxims of a universally legislating member of a merely possible kingdom of ends.”
Kant’s moral philosophy focuses on fairness and the value of the individual.
Kant asks us to remember that every time we act, we are contributing to the idea and nature of acting. We are making it normal and we always have the choice to act according to universal moral laws
Kant’s moral philosophy rests on ‘free Will’. Your actions should have Universality, they should be an end in themselves and autonomous.
This maxim envisions a community or society where individuals, as rational beings, legislate moral principles for themselves and others. It encourages acting in ways that contribute to a harmonious "kingdom of ends" where everyone is guided by morally principled maxims.
💡 CRITICISM
Rigidity and Absoluteness:
Some argue that the moral rules derived from the categorical imperative are too strict and inflexible
lacking the necessary nuance to address the complexities of real-world ethical dilemmas.
Lack of Guidance in Specific Cases:
does not provide concrete guidance for specific moral dilemmas. It sets out a general principle but might be insufficient in offering practical solutions in complex, real-world situations where conflicting duties are at play.
Conflict Resolution:
Kant's framework doesn't offer a clear method for resolving conflicts between duties when they arise. In situations where two or more moral duties seem to be in conflict, the categorical imperative may not provide a clear resolution.
Individualism and Autonomy:
Kant's emphasis on individual autonomy may be criticized for neglecting the importance of communal values and the relational aspects of morality. Some argue that a purely individualistic approach might not capture the complexities of moral life.
Ethical Outcomes:
Critics argue that Kant's emphasis on the intention behind an action rather than its consequences might lead to morally questionable outcomes. In some situations, a focus on consequences may be deemed more relevant in determining the ethical nature of an action
You must be logged in to post a comment.