Kantian Deontology: The Categorical Imperative “Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing wonder and awe: the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me.”
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1. Kantian Deontology: The Categorical Imperative Two things
fill the mind with ever new and increasing wonder and awe: the
starry heavens above me and the moral law within me.
2. Kants Copernican Revolution Where does Copernicus (=Polish
astronomer) place us in the physical universe? Nicolaus Copernicus
(1473-1543) turned astronomy inside-out by hypothesising that the
earth moved around the sun (instead of the other way round) Where
does Kant (= Prussian philosopher) place us in the moral universe?
Kant turned epistemology inside-out by theorising that objective
reality depends on the mind (instead of the other way round).
Similarly, morality depends purely on rational considerations. The
individual moral agent is at the centre of their own moral
universe.
3. Deontology Assessing Acts Morality is a matter of duty and
obligation. Actions are right or wrong in themselves. Whether
something is right or wrong doesnt depend on its consequences. But
on the way choosers think when they make choices. We each have
duties regarding our own actions: we are autonomous moral
agents.
4. Happiness vs. Reason Morality motivates us to act Our
actions must be brought about by either reason or happiness.
Happiness is conditional: what makes people happy differs, and
happiness can be good or bad. But reason is universal, categorical.
unconditional.
5. The Good Will Reason only one of our traits of character is
inherently/unconditionally good Name some virtues Are they always
good or used for good ends? The Good Will = our power of rational
moral choice = unconditionally good found only in humans gives us
inherent dignity as autonomous moral agents
6. More about the Will What makes the will good? when it acts
out of duty, not out of inclination. What does it mean to act out
of inclination? To do something because it makes you feel good or
because you hope to gain something from it to act to maximise your
happiness, basically. What does it mean to act out of duty? when
you act out of respect for the moral law. How do act out of duty?
we must know what the moral law is. How do we know that? we use the
"Categorical Imperative."
7. What is an imperative? An imperative is just a command. A
hypothetical imperative is a command that presupposes some further
goal or end i.e. if I want X I should do Y But nothing compels you
to do Y A categorical imperative is not hypothetical. It is
unconditional. i.e. do X It is irrational and immoral not to obey
it For Kant, morals = categorical imperatives
8. Kants Categorical Imperative Morality is universal, the same
for everyone: Everyone must admit that a law, if it is to be
[legitimately binding] has to carry absolute necessity with it
Kant, Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals Rationally speaking,
the moral law must be obeyed. And when we act, we act on maxims or
practical principles of action. so Act only on that maxim through
which you can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law.
9. The three formulations of the Categorical Imperative Formula
of Universal Law: "Act as if the maxim of your action were to
secure through your will a universal law of nature" Formula of
Humanity: "Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own
person or that of another, always as an end and never as a means
only" Formula of Autonomy: Act as if you were through your maxims a
law making member of a kingdom of ends."
10. Starter: Quickfire Questions 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. What two
things fill Kant with awe? What is Kants Copernican Revolution?
Fill in the blanks: A_______ M_____ A_______... Why reason, not
happiness? Why duty, not inclination? What is Kants Good Will? What
is the difference between a hypothetical and a categorical
imperative? 7. What do the phrases Universal Law, Humanity,
Autonomy refer to?
11. What is a Categorical Imperative? In effect, two rules for
testing rules of conduct or maxims - pass = a possible CI First
test: contradiction in conception or selfcontradiction First,
generalise the maxim and see if it makes sense. A maxim is wrong if
the situation in which everyone acted on that maxim is somehow
self-contradictory. Take stealing: If we could all just help
ourselves to whatever we wanted, the idea of owning things would
disappear; And then no one would be able to steal.
12. The Categorical Imperative Second test: contradiction in
will (a.k.a. reversibility) If the maxim youre testing isnt
self-contradictory then ask: would you choose to live in a world
where it was followed by everyone as then it would apply to you as
an individual would you mind being governed by it? It is logically
possible to universalise some unpleasant maxims e.g. dont help
others in need But we cant will this maxim, because we might need
help ourselves. So such a maxim is not reversible. So it cannot be
willed without contradiction.
13. The case of the false promise Kants example about
non-contradiction Maxim: I may make a false promise in order to
reap financial gain. Generalised: Anyone may make a false promise
to get something s/he wants. This is self-contradictory because: If
anyone may make a "false promise," nobody would take a promise
seriously; promising becomes meaningless. Result: I may not act on
that maxim, as the maxim fails the contradiction in conception
test.
14. Stealing, Lying Similar reasoning leads Kant to conclude
that any maxim permitting theft or lying must be rejected. Why? A
thief's maxim, once generalised, would overturn the institution of
property, but unless the institution of property exists, there can
be no theft. A liar's maxim, once generalised, would overturn the
assumption of truthfulness, but without this assumption, no lie can
even be attempted.
15. The case of The Bad Samaritan Kants example about
reversibility Maxim: I may refuse to help another person in
distress who cannot pay me even though I could do so at little cost
to myself. Generalised: Anyone may refuse to help another person in
distress who cannot pay her even though it would cost her little to
help. Can it be conceived without contradiction? Yes. So being mean
passes the non-contradiction test for it to be a Categorical
Imperative:
16. The Bad Samaritan II But does it pass the second test,
Reversibility? Could you will yourself in the same position?
Probably not, because you might find yourself in a situation of
extreme need and nobody else would help you. If this did happen to
you, you would wish to be helped. So the Bad Samaritan maxim is not
reversible Hence not really universalisable. Result: You cannot act
on the "Bad Samaritan" maxim. But: contradiction in will test -
logical force...?
17. Starter: some objections to Kant Exceptionless rules are
extremely dangerous. The standard is an inhuman one against which
to judge our actions. Isnt it a very high standard? Is it possible
not to use people in order to obtain your goals or seek an edge or
unfair advantage? Might this not make us goalless? Surely our
natural desires are worthy? Would Kant really view parental love
for children as immoral? Doesnt duty sound rather like habit? Isnt
it better to do things from inclination? Suppose I am inclined to
hit you but control myself surely this is more valuable to you than
someone who is just nice to you from habit? What role does
character play in all this? Would a habitually moral scumbag be
possible? The choices necessary to live a good life could involve
actions which entail results incompatible with happiness. How far
should respect for persons go? Can we imagine circumstances where
contingent circumstances might really matter? Can we imagine
circumstances where imperatives might clash?
18. Starter: some strengths of Kant People have rights which
would supersede, for example, the tyranny of the majority in
utilitarianism. Achieving good ends by despicable means is ruled
out. People cannot be exploited. We avoid the many problems to do
with weighing up and working out consequences. We dont have the
issue of explaining why or how we have moral intuitions.
19. Starter 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. What is the contradiction
in conception test? What is a maxim? What is the contradiction in
will test? What is wrong with lying? What is wrong with not
helping? What is wrong with liking helping? What is wrong with
loving your children? What is wrong with inclination, and what does
Kant prefer? 9. What shines like a star for its own sake? 10. Name
each of the three formulations of the Categorical Imperative.
20. Example essay-questions 08 Examine the difficulties
nonconsequentialists face in explaining how certain actions are
necessary. (50 marks) 0 8 Assess the view that what makes an action
moral is that it is motivated by a sense of duty. (50 marks)
21. Starter: who or what? Kants influences Plato David Hume
(1711 1776) The Age of Enlightenment, the Enlightenment, the Age of
Reason) Sir Isaac Newton (1642 1727) Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712 -
1778) Martin Luther Lutherans (1483-1546)