Kantian Deontology

What is good will for Kant? (3)

"The good without qualification." It is an absolute good in itself, universally good in every instance, and never merely a means to some further end.

Define deontological ethics (3)

Morality depends on doing the right action with the right intention, regardless of consequences. Morality is a matter of duty. Actions are right or wrong in themselves, not because of their outcomes.

What does Kant mean by contradiction in conception? (3)

When universalizing a maxim leads to a logical impossibility. E.g., universalizing "I ought to steal" would make the concept of private property (and thus stealing) impossible.

What does Kant mean by contradiction in will? (3)

When universalizing a maxim is logically possible but no rational person could will it because it would undermine their own ends. E.g., universalizing "never help others" would make achieving one's own goals impossible.

Outline the distinction between hypothetical and categorical imperatives (5)

Hypothetical: "If you want X, do Y." Means to an end, no moral worth, you can opt out. Categorical: "Do Y." Unconditional duty, moral worth, cannot opt out, universalizable.

Outline the distinction between acting in accordance with duty and acting out of duty (5)

Acting out of duty: motivated by duty alone, has moral worth, autonomous. Acting in accordance with duty: action is right but motivated by inclination/desire, no moral worth, heteronomous.

Outline the first formulation of the categorical imperative (5)

"Act only according to a maxim that you can at the same time will should become a universal law without contradiction." Tests maxims via universalization. Contradiction in conception → perfect duty. Contradiction in will → imperfect duty.

Outline the second formulation of the categorical imperative (5)

"Treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never merely as a means." Requires respecting the rational autonomy and dignity of persons, helping them pursue their own ends.

Explain the issue that Kant ignores the value of certain motives (5)

Kant says only duty-motivated acts have moral worth. This devalues acts from love, compassion, etc. (e.g., visiting a sick friend out of care, not duty). It seems cold and inhuman, ignoring the moral worth of good feelings.

Explain why Kantian ethics faces an issue with clashing duties (5)

Kant's perfect duties are absolute. In conflicts (e.g., don't lie vs. don't kill—axe murderer at door), the theory gives no clear guidance. This shows it may be impractical as a complete moral system.

Explain the issue that not all universalizable maxims are distinctly moral (5)

Some maxims pass the universalization test but are immoral (e.g., "Steal if your name has 7 letters"). This shows the Categorical Imperative can justify immoral actions, questioning its adequacy.

Explain the issue that not all non-universalizable maxims are immoral (5)

Some good maxims fail universalization (e.g., "Give to the poor" leads to contradiction in conception). This means Kant's test can forbid morally good actions, showing a flaw in the formula.

Explain the issue that consequences of actions determine their moral value (5)

Kant ignores consequences. In dilemmas (e.g., Trolley Problem), refusing to act (e.g., not switching tracks) may cause greater harm. This suggests consequences do matter morally, challenging Kant's purely duty-based approach.

Explain Phillipa Foot's argument that morality is a system of hypothetical imperatives (5)

Foot argues moral demands are not categorical. One can opt out of morality without being irrational (like an amoralist). Therefore, moral rules are hypothetical imperatives contingent on wanting to participate in the moral "game."