Transcript Kantian Ethics

Kantian Ethics
Categorical Imperative
Universal Maxim
Respect of Persons
MORALITY IN THE MODERN
WORLD

Area 1: The Relationship between Religion and Moral Values
Introduction (pp. 1-7)


Religious Morality (pp. 8-21)



Moral values are grounded in religious belief
The interpretation of sacred writings guided by faith, tradition and/or reason
Utilitarian Ethics (pp. 29-33)



The Euthyphro Dilemma ‘Are actions ‘good’ simply because the gods
command them or do the gods command certain actions because they are
‘good’?’
Act and Rule utilitarianism
Principle of the greatest good
Kantian Ethics (pp. 34-37)



Categorical imperative
Universal maxim
Respect of persons
Duty and Reason

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was
all about duty.

He felt that using reason you can
think about what’s right to do based
on how you think you should act.

According to Kant there should be
no attention paid to consequences
(unlike Utilitarianism) because they
are far too difficult to predict and
don’t take into account your
motivation.
Duty and Reason

Kant felt that what is right is what you feel you
ought to do. We can understand what we ought
to do by using practical reason.

“The intention of his (Kant’s) morality is to set
aside all ego-centredness, and move towards an
unconditional and universal sympathy.”
Ethical Theory, M Thompson, Hodder & Staughton, 1999
Kant’s shopkeepers

Kant compares two shopkeepers who
both give correct change:
The first is honest because he is scared of
being caught if he tries to cheat his
customers.
2. The second is honest because it is his duty
to be honest.
1.

According to Kant, only the second
shopkeeper is behaving morally.
Right and Wrong?

In his writing Kant did not spend a great deal of time
explaining what he thought was right or wrong, only that
we should develop an internal ‘voice’ which would tell us
what we should do in any given situation.

When faced with a moral problem we should apply
reason and come up with what we ought to do in that
situation.

To Kant, everyone has a duty to take part in this type of
moral-decision making: which he called the categorical
imperative.
Check your learning

Kant and duty

Kant and reason

Kant and consequences

Kant and right and wrong
Categorical imperative

“Act as if the maxim from which you
were to act were to become through
your will a general law.”
Critique of Pure Reason, Kant, 1788

Maxim: A succinct formulation of a fundamental
principle, general truth, or rule of conduct

Put this into your own words for your notes.
Categorical imperative in my own
words…
 “Act
as if the maxim from which
you were to act were to become
through your will a general law.”
Critique of Pure Reason, Kant, 1788

‘What would it be like if everyone did that?’
Universal maxim

The categorical imperative requires that any
moral decision you make must be acceptable for
everyone else to do too.

If so, your action is right.

If your decision is not okay for everyone
everywhere then it would be wrong.
Universal maxim

Every moral decision has to be universally
applicable or universalisable.
Check your learning

Kant’s categorical imperative

Maxim

Universalisability(!)
Respect for people

As well as this, Kant wrote that people should be
respected and ‘ends’ in themselves, never used as
‘means to ends’.

Kant believed there was something that separates
human and non-human beings: the ability to understand
and use the concepts of duty and reason.

To Kant, ‘animals’ are dominated by instinct and desire,
their behaviour shaped by these compulsions. For
example…
They eat
They fight
They have sex
And when its all over they sleep
Kant, of course, accepted
that human beings are no
different to animals in that
we share their instincts
and desires.
We eat
Fight
Have sex
And when its all over we sleep
However to Kant, what separates
humans from non-humans is our
ability to REASON.
According to Kant it is this faculty
that enables us to act freely against
our instincts and desires if we so
choose.
Check your learning

Kant on respect for people

Kant on Humans/Non-humans
Problems with Duty and Reason

Can there be such a thing as pure reason, and if
there is, can we apply it to moral-decision
making?

How do we agree on what ‘ought’ to be done in
a given situation?

Do we share the same concept of ‘duty’
universally? If not how can we agree on what
‘ought’ to be done?
Problems with Duty and Reason

Can we really apply clear reason in the
real world?

Surely consequences do matter…

Can we really apply a moral rule like not
killing others to every situation?
Suppose one evening you hear
a knock on the door. You
answer and a woman is
standing there looking scared.
She tells you she is on the run
from a man who is trying to kill
her and asks for you to help
hide her.
1. What is the correct decision
according to Kant? Why?
3. What problems does this
raise?
In this case the fundamental
principle is whether you
should help someone who is
in need.
Kant would have felt that this
was a right thing to do.
Using reason you could argue
that helping someone who is
in need is something
everyone ought to do (a duty).
It is also universalisable as
everyone should do it.
A few minutes later you hear a
knock on the door. A man is
standing there with an axe in
his hand. He appears to be
very angry, shows you a picture
of the woman you have just
hidden and asks you if you
have seen her.
1. What is the correct decision
according to Kant? Why?
3. What problems does this
raise?
In this case the fundamental
principle is whether you
should lie.
Kant would have felt that
this was the wrong thing to
do.
Using reason you could
argue that lying should not
be allowed.
If I lie I am saying the
everyone else has a duty to
lie also. This is not
universalisable.
Check your learning

What are some problems with Kantian
ethics?

Explain the case of the knocking door…
Christianity on Kant’s Duty and
Reason

There is also an emphasis on
duty in Christianity.

Clear guiding principles exist
within the Bible especially the
teaching of Jesus.

‘To love one another’ sounds like
a universalisable principle and
therefore the categorical
imperative.
Christianity on Kant’s Duty and
Reason

However these principles require
interpretation, meaning that to
keep one you have to ignore
another.

For example: Christians think you
ought to protect the weak and
you ought to preserve life. These
principles may become
contradictory depending on the
situation
Buddhism on Kant’s
Duty and Reason

The Buddha taught that his teachings must be used in
practice and that if they do not work for you, they should
be abandoned. This appears to be in opposition to the
categorical imperative.

Buddhists in turn do not have a duty to follow teachings if
they do not work for them in practice.

Buddhist ethics are in opposition to moral absolutes.
Instead Buddhists are expected to think about a moral
decision depending on the circumstances.
Buddhism on Kant’s
Duty and Reason

However, Buddhists do speak of having
certain duties like not killing, stealing, lying
etc.

When ordained, a monk or nun has many
more duties they are expected to keep.
Viewpoints Independent of
Religious Belief on Kant’s
Duty and Reason

Humanists argue that we have a duty to others
and our common humanity should trigger how
we relate to one another.

For example, to ‘Treat every human being as
equal’ is something we ought to do.

However, this is because to a Humanist certain
basic human actions are right in themselves,
they need no justification.

To Humanists, ‘responsibilities’ go hand in hand
with ‘rights’.
Viewpoints Independent of
Religious Belief on Kant’s Duty
and Reason

Onora O’Neil is a modern Kantian
Philosopher who has interpreted Kantian
ethics for today.
“Starting premise: ‘We are all moral equals.’
Rather than deriving: ‘Therefore, we all have equal rights.’
Kant derives: ‘Therefore, we all have equal duties.’
We should not act on principles that are unfit to be
principles for all.”
Check your learning

Christians on Kant

Buddhists on Kant

Humanists on Kant

Onora O’neil’s interpretation of Kant
MORALITY IN THE MODERN
WORLD

Area 1: The Relationship between Religion and Moral Values
Introduction (pp. 1-7)


Religious Morality (pp. 8-21)



Moral values are grounded in religious belief
The interpretation of sacred writings guided by faith, tradition and/or reason
Utilitarian Ethics (pp. 29-33)



The Euthyphro Dilemma ‘Are actions ‘good’ simply because the gods
command them or do the gods command certain actions because they are
‘good’?’
Act and Rule utilitarianism
Principle of the greatest good
Kantian Ethics (pp. 34-37)



Categorical imperative
Universal maxim
Respect of persons
Extension exercises
How would Kant feel about Crime and
Punishment?

How would Kant feel about the Purpose of
Punishment?

How would Kant feel about Capital
Punishment?