Kantian ethics

What is the categorical imperative? In contrast to hypothetical imperative?

• a command to act that is good in itself regardless of consequences

• an unconditional imperative of morality

• hypothetical imperative - if this.. do this.. . Means are specified by goals.

Describe the origins of the concept of duty for Kant

• predicating our rightness and wrongness of actions cannot be known through experience for Kant

• moral statements are synthetic because we cannot prove a necessary connection between predicate and subject of statement - there is a leap between what is the case, and what ought to be the case

• for Kant, the only thing that is good in itself is the good will - doing right for its own sake. Morality is not driven by compassion or emotional motivations, because emotions and desires don’t seem to be directly under our control.

• all humans possess rationality. Morality is autonomous, by using our human reason we can work out what can be applied to all human beings. This forms the basis for the categorical imperative, from which all duties are derived

What is the first formulation of the categorical imperative?

• act only on that maxim which you could at the same time will to be a universal law

Maxims must pass two tests to be universalised.
1. Contradiction in conception

2. Contradiction in the will - you will any dispensable means towards this end.

What are some of Kant’s perfect duties?

To oneself:

• prohibition of suicide. If everyone universalised the maxim to end their own life when unhappy, this would create a logical contradiction in conception.

To others:

• never make a false promise. This would erode the very concept of a promise. E.g. of someone borrowing money promising to repay it, knowing that he can never do so. Supposing this was a universal law that everyone in difficulty should promise whatever he pleases, the promise would be impossible, as well as the end that one might have in view with it. This universalisation would turn all promises into ‘vain pretences’.

Perfect duties must be followed at all times without exception.

What are some of Kant’s imperfect duties?

• duty to develop one’s talents.

  • one could not will any indispensable means to letting talents rest and resolve to idleness. As a rational being, one would necessarily will that his faculties be developed since they serve him for all sorts of possible purposes.

• duty to help others.

  • while a world where everyone adopts a selfish attitude could theoretically exist, no rational person would actually will such a world, because you will inevitably encounter situations where you will need the help of others.

Kant uses these two maxims as examples of maxims that might be universalised without any contradiction, but could not pass the contradiction in the will test.

What is the second formulation of the categorical imperative

• always treat humanity never simply as means to an end but as ends in themselves

We have positive duties to people.

Shouldn’t treat people as tools for one’s use.

What is the third formulation of the categorical imperative

• act in accordance with the maxims of a member giving universal laws for a merely possible kingdom of ends

• we must consider ourselves as lawmakers in an ideal world where everyone acts to the first two formulations

• it requires we conform our actions to the laws of an ideal moral legislature, which lays down universally binding laws

• the idea is that our fundamental moral obligation is to act on principles which could earn acceptance by a community of fully rational agents, each of whom have an equal share in legislating these principles for their community

• the kingdom of ends is an ideal moral community in which all rational beings act as both lawmakers and subjects of laws, treating each other and themselves as ends in themselves

What are Kant’s three postulates?

• they are assumptions we must accept, explaining why one should act morally, as otherwise summum bonum is not possible

1. Free will. If we do not freely choose our actions, we are not responsible for them.

2. Immortality. Good deeds can only be proportionately rewarded if there is eternal life. Soul needs infinite time to progress towards moral perfection.

3. God. God must exist to enforce justice. Guarantees the highest good is actually attainable, that virtue is ultimately rewarded with happiness.

What is the summum bonum?

• the highest happiness - the singular and overriding end which human beings ought to pursue

• moral perfection is perfectly combined with complete hapiness

Critiques of Kant’s theory? With responses?

• We are prone to make exceptions in our moral judgements, mostly in favour of friends, but this is less excusable in Kantian ethics. Man is of intrinsic worth - universalisability of maxims means that our duties to others are no different from our duties to ourselves.

  • Bernard Williams argues that Kantian morality is too narrow - acting solely on duty is unnatural. E.g. visiting a friend in hospital out of duty, not out of compassion. A virtuous person does not need to be thinking about moral laws, they can do good out of habit. Kant accepts a false dichotomy - he thought we could either act out of duty or self-interested personal desires. A rational cultivation of virtue allows a person to reliably control their habitual emotional reactions in a morally relevant and interested way.

    • We need a legalistic impersonal moral framework. We can be motivated by as much or little emotion as we like, but it means there is an underlying consistent guiding maxim that only relies on rationality, that we can expect everyone to be led by.

• it corrects the utilitarian presumption that morality of an action cannot be derived from the benefit produced, or from the number of those who obtain that benefit, but from the intrinsic rightness of the action performed.

  • Sartre argues that there are clashing duties - e.g. a soldier deciding between looking after sick parent, or going to war to defend his country. Both are the solider’s duty. How is soldier meant to decide? Is Kantian ethics too abstract?

    • if we think there are clashing duties, we haven’t used our reason properly. He distinguished between perfect duties (e.g. never make a lying promise) and imperfect duties - where there are multiple ways of fulfilling them. These duties are more general guidelines that allow for flexibility in how and when they are fulfilled.

      • But, his claim that moral people are those who live solely in obedience to the rules generated by the categorical imperative might mean that doing one’s duty means obeying rules to which we feel no moral obligation whatsoever. E.g. whenever anybody buys a new book, the purchaser should write his or her name on the fly-leaf. This maxim is potentially universalisable, but it appears to be a morally neutral rule that few would hold to be obligatory. Thus, it cannot be true to say that a moral person is one who acts in accordance with the categorical imperative.