Assess the view that kanthan ethics do not help with practical moral decision making

INTRO:

Emmanuel Kant
Deontological/absolutist theory
Based on human ability to reason
Allows us to find out “our duty” and pursue good will
Categorical/ hypothetical imperatives
3 formulations: 1) universal law 2) ends in themselves 3) kingdom of ends
NOT HELPFUL- abstract, relies on reason and

PARAGRAPH 1:

Point: incorrectly relies on reason
Agree: HUME- moral judgments being motivating involve desire which is an emotion.
Reason doesn’t provide sufficient grounding for moral decision making.
If something isn’t motivating we wouldn’t care about doing and clearly not doing it for right reason.
Kants ideal for good will is impossibility to achieve
Disagree: moral judgements are therefore not based on how we feel that day, moral actions are more consistent.
Kant supports Plato’s idea of separation between emotion and reason
Believes as rational entities we have the ability to separate emotion and reason.
Agree: HUME- “reason is and ought to be the slave of passion” if we are critiqued for something we care deeply about and have nothing to say- rely on anger and emotion

PARAGRAPH 2:

Point- Theory is too abstract too apply and cannot be put into practical use
Agree: categorical imperative hard to achieve and unrealistic
Deontological nature- straight forward and rigid system
Relies on a priori concept not empirical data
Disagree- clear right/wrong principles- maxim and duty easy to grasp
Agree: unrealistic- shop keeper, use everyone as means to and end
Disagree- don’t “soley” use people as means to an end

PARAGRAPH 3:

Point: leads to conflicting duties (murderer at door problem)
Agree: Maxims aren’t specific enough to relevant situations
Universal laws=unhelpful and unspecific don’t factor in context of why people do things
Reason= flawed and unreliable
Conflicting duties