Kant

Kant

1. Kant’s ethics are deontological and this means that moral decisions are based on whether the actions are good, not the consequences. If an action is right, then it’s right in all circumstances and in all conditions.

   • Absolutes
     • No False Promises
       • Don't lie
       • Don't kill
       • No suicide

2. Duty is a universal obligation and conveys willing obedience to universal maxims and the laws derived from these.

   • The ‘ought of moral situations is only applicable when it can be done.
     • OUGHT IMPLIES CAN
     • it is not out duty to do things that we are unable to do.
   • Duty is linked to goodwill
     • Good will is the only good thing
       • Gives us the highest good
   • Kant believed that when we act out of duty, we are acting out of a desire to be moral.
   • Therefore, it can be said that doing our duty will have the reward of the highest good or the summum bonum.

3. Kant also argues that will is free and independent. This is necessary for our morality to be meaningful. To make rational choices we must be free, and to do our duty we must be free. If our actions are not the result of free choices, then our actions cannot be regarded as the result of a moral agent.

4. The summum bonum is the highest good. Kant believed that the moral ‘ought’ implied ‘can’, so we can achieve our moral goals and complete our duty perfectly. Faultless duty would result in perfect happiness- the summum bonum.

   • As this cannot be achieved in one lifetime, Kant postulated that there must be some kind of afterlife, one where the summum bonum could be achieved,
     • Three postulates
       • Life after death.
       • immortality
       • existence of a god

5. Actions not concequesnces

   • Which make decisions
     • Based on reason
       • Not religion
         • Using our free will
           • Following the Categorical Imperative
             • Following the CI is doing our duty
               • Which leads to good will
                 • Which leads to the SB
                   • As this is our reward for doing our duty

6. Secular

   • do not relate to or have their basis in any religion

7. Rationality

   • The basis of Kant’s ethics is innate reason. Kant argued that human beings are rational and so are able to work out what is right and wrong. The actions that emanate from the rational moral law are either morally right or wrong in themselves, that is, intrinsically good or bad. Kant also believed that moral laws were binding on human beings. This stemmed from his views about human beings as rational beings.

8. CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE

   • Kant’s first formulation of the categorical imperative is the universal law. Kant argued that the only actions that are moral are those actions which can be universalised (applies to situations and to all rational beings).
   • Kant’s second formulation of the categorical imperative is that we should treat human beings as ends in themselves. Kant held human beings as the pinnacle of creation. Therefore, it can never be moral to exploit people, to use them as a means to an end. Each person is unique and of equal value and so cannot be sacrificed, even if it would result in some overall greater good.
   • Kant’s third formulation of the categorical imperative is that we should act as if you live in a kingdom of ends. Kant requires moral statements to be such that you act as if you, and everyone else, were treating each other as ends. You have to imagine that you live in an ideal society, even if that was not the case. You cannot act on a rule that assumes that others don’t treat people as ends.

9. Strengths

   • It is practical to apply to many situations.
   • It states clear rules. For example, it is against abortion on the grounds that we have a duty to preserve life, and whatever the status of the foetus, it will develop into a rational human being.
   • It emphasises the importance of each person. Everyone is equally valued in their own right.
   • It is applies universally and it therefore impartial. If a certain act is right, the it is right in all circumstances
   • It treats people as ends rather than as means to an end. Therefore it is against the exploitation of people. This approach gives high value to human beings.
   • It emphasises motive and intention rather than just the outward behaviour. This avoids the problem of doing something that appears outwardly good, but is in fact, carried out for immoral reasons. In such case, Kantian ethics would deem such an act as immoral.

10. Weaknesses

    • Kant put ‘obligation’ as the reason for acting morally. However, it is not clear why that motive is superior to motives such as love and compassion. Many ma feel that it is difficult to defend keeping someone alive on the grounds of ‘obligation’, when that person is suffering acutely with terminal illness. The appeal to love and compassion, which sounds like higher motives seem ignored
    • Fundamental to Kant’s theory is the idea of being free to choose as an individual and the notion that humans are rational beings. However, both of these have been challenged. Modern science looks to nurture and nature to explain the cause of our actions, while experience of life seems to suggest that people do not always act rationally.
    • Sense of duty can be explained by other means, for example how we are moulded by society.
    • Kant claimed that there was only one categorical imperative and the other maxims were just stating the same point in a different way. However, it is disputed whether the three aspects of the categorical imperative are equivalent, meaning that Kant’s system is incoherent.
    • It does not accept exceptions and so is not flexible enough. What happens if two duties conflict? For instance, the duty to preserve life can conflict with the duty to protect life, as in the case of war.
    • Is universalizability feasible? The deontological approach does not allow for the variety of situations to arise. 6. Why make the assumption that only God can bring about the highest good?
    • Why make the assumption that virtue must be rewarded with happiness?

11. COMPATIBILITY

    • Not compatible;
      • Kant’s system can be totally independent of God as human beings make their own decisions and the law is autonomous and independent of religion.
      • They are in stark contrast to teleological, consequential systems such as situation ethics.
      • The inflexibility of an absolutist system is inconsistent with the ideas of forgiveness, tolerance and non-judgement.
      • If a system is therefore inflexible with its application can appear to be lacking virtue and thus clearly inconsistent with virtuous religious teaching.
    • Compatible
      • The idea of virtue and reward is the basis of religious morality: for example, heaven and hell, the idea of judgement.
      • The idea that a moral law is given by god supports the ideas of moral absolutes.
      • Some Christians would indicate that the Ten Commandments are clear examples of the categorical imperative’s maxims at works.
      • There are clear parallels with the natural law (developed by Roman Catholic Aquinas), especially with the idea of reason.
      • The summum bonum us clearly a religious concept when one identifies the postulates of practical reason