(Deontology) Kantian Ethics Anthology Notes (copy)
Paragraph 1:
Everything and everyone is governed by laws + rational beings are able to follow this. Rational beings require reason to follow these laws.
Will is dependant upon reason + the action from the output can either be subjective or objectively necessary
Actions that are collectively recognised as necessary, are reliant upon opinion
Paragraph 3:
All imperatives are meant to be followed (strong recommendation) but objective laws to not determine reason from a will.
Practical good is based on reason alone and is only objective. → meets the will of everyone and is not based on opinion
Paragraph 4:
Perfectly good will is not necessary in accordance with lawful actions as it is only shown through the outcome of the good
Divine law is the opposite as it is necessary as it is already connected with the law. Therefore it is not considered as subjective as it is an obligation, not out of our will
Paragraph 5:
Imperatives → categorical and hypothetical
Categorical imperative = a necessary action that does not have any ulterior motives
Hypothetically imperative = a necessary principle that aims to obtain something else
Paragraph 6:
Focuses on the principle/why the action was caused not the outcome → categorical imperative
Paragraph 7:
Categorical imperative is based on logic and reason (a-priori)
Views as a law that must be followed whereas the others are principles that are recommendations.
Categorical imperative does not allow subjective opinion and is not contingent which is why it is necessary. The law depends on both the precept + aim whereas the principles can remove either
Paragraph 8:
Hypothetical imperative is more of an uncertain situation whereas categorical imperative is certain in the process + outcome
The imperative only contains what is necessary and must be done
Paragraph 9:
Categorical imperative - act only according to the maxim so you can also will it in order for it to become a universal law
Paragraph 10:
Laws that are universally accepted can be considered ‘nature’. Therefore, as it is in accordance with universal laws, the universal imperative will also become the universal law of nature
Paragraph 11:
Human beings have a purpose and should not be used for other things other than this purpose e.g. other’s wills
Inclinations have very little worth that is it better to remove them from every rational being (humans)
Nature has already given natural beings a purpose + worth so they are an end in themselves.
Rational beings are not to be used by people to be given an end but objective with a given worth already.
If all things had absolute worth, there would be no main principle to follow
Paragraph 12:
There is meant to be a supreme practical principle that represents an end for everyone as it is an end in itself
Rational nature exists as an end in itself
Human beings represent their existence as an end in itself → human actions follow a subjective principle
Every other rational being represents its existence the same way but through an objective principle.
Paragraph 1:
Everything and everyone is governed by laws + rational beings are able to follow this. Rational beings require reason to follow these laws.
Will is dependant upon reason + the action from the output can either be subjective or objectively necessary
Actions that are collectively recognised as necessary, are reliant upon opinion
Paragraph 3:
All imperatives are meant to be followed (strong recommendation) but objective laws to not determine reason from a will.
Practical good is based on reason alone and is only objective. → meets the will of everyone and is not based on opinion
Paragraph 4:
Perfectly good will is not necessary in accordance with lawful actions as it is only shown through the outcome of the good
Divine law is the opposite as it is necessary as it is already connected with the law. Therefore it is not considered as subjective as it is an obligation, not out of our will
Paragraph 5:
Imperatives → categorical and hypothetical
Categorical imperative = a necessary action that does not have any ulterior motives
Hypothetically imperative = a necessary principle that aims to obtain something else
Paragraph 6:
Focuses on the principle/why the action was caused not the outcome → categorical imperative
Paragraph 7:
Categorical imperative is based on logic and reason (a-priori)
Views as a law that must be followed whereas the others are principles that are recommendations.
Categorical imperative does not allow subjective opinion and is not contingent which is why it is necessary. The law depends on both the precept + aim whereas the principles can remove either
Paragraph 8:
Hypothetical imperative is more of an uncertain situation whereas categorical imperative is certain in the process + outcome
The imperative only contains what is necessary and must be done
Paragraph 9:
Categorical imperative - act only according to the maxim so you can also will it in order for it to become a universal law
Paragraph 10:
Laws that are universally accepted can be considered ‘nature’. Therefore, as it is in accordance with universal laws, the universal imperative will also become the universal law of nature
Paragraph 11:
Human beings have a purpose and should not be used for other things other than this purpose e.g. other’s wills
Inclinations have very little worth that is it better to remove them from every rational being (humans)
Nature has already given natural beings a purpose + worth so they are an end in themselves.
Rational beings are not to be used by people to be given an end but objective with a given worth already.
If all things had absolute worth, there would be no main principle to follow
Paragraph 12:
There is meant to be a supreme practical principle that represents an end for everyone as it is an end in itself
Rational nature exists as an end in itself
Human beings represent their existence as an end in itself → human actions follow a subjective principle
Every other rational being represents its existence the same way but through an objective principle.