Autonomous Thinking and Immanuel Kant

694 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Kant’s categorical imperative

Considered to be one of the most important philosophers of modern Europe and an important part of philosophical thinking, Immanuel Kant paved the way for current ethical thinkers. He paved the way for philosophers and social behavioral scientists such as Jean Piaget. Kant's theory is hinged by his beliefs on autonomy and his formulation of categorical imperatives.
Kant believed in autonomy however, knowing that autonomy has flaws, he created the categorical imperatives. Autonomy allows us to be self creating when it comes to our values and morality. Autonomy is ones own beliefs, independence, and government: acting without regard for anyone else. Conversely, heteronomy is acting under the influence of someone else and allows for an individual to consistently place blame outside of self. Kant believed that each individual is rational and capable of making free choices; thereby relies on autonomous thinking (Wikipedia, 2009.)

Kant understood that autonomous thinking in and of itself is flawed. To address these flaws, he created the three maxims known as categorical imperatives. These imperatives state: maxims should be chosen with regard to the universal laws of nature (perfect and imperfect duty), do not use humanity of ourselves or others as a means to an end, and one should "act that we may think of ourselves as a member in the universal realm of ends (Wikipedia, 2009.")

The first maxim states that we should choose our 'codes of conduct' only if they serve perfect / imperfect duty and are good for all. Perfect duties are blameworthy if not met and are the basic requirements for a human being. An example of perfect duty is the avoidance of suicide. Suicide is the end of life and Kant believed that "self love impels the improveme...

... middle of paper ...

...others as we would have done unto us. If we believe that we are justified in murder then we have broken Kant's belief that murder does not benefit the universal good. Under Kant's theory we can only position ourselves for the benefit of universal good thereby denying ourselves the opportunity to live by any other code. If we deny codes of conduct, we could easily deny our religions. Kant believed we could not rely on religion because the belief in G*d cannot be concretely proven. Individuals could not be held to the written mitzvahs since they were constructed by an entity whose existence cannot be proven and cannot be considered to be autonomous in thought (Kemeringly, 2001.) Without laws to govern humanity, I believe humanity would perish and would argue that fully autonomous thinking does not benefit humankind universally. It is selfish and merely self righteous.

Show More
Related

  • Analysis of Immanuel Kant's Arguements in The Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals”

    553 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the essay titled “Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals” published in the Morality and Moral Controversies course textbook, Immanuel Kant argues that the view of the world and its laws is structured by human concepts and categories, and the rationale of it is the source of morality which depends upon belief in the existence of God. In Kant’s work, categorical imperative was established in order to have a standard rationale from where all moral requirements derive. Therefore, categorical imperative is an obligation to act morally, out of duty and good will alone. In Immanuel Kant’s writing human reason and or rational are innate morals which are responsible for helping human. Needless to say, this also allows people to be able to distinct right from wrong. For the aforementioned reasons, there is no doubt that any action has to be executed solely out of a duty alone and it should not focus on the consequence but on the motive and intent of the action. Kant supports his argument by dividing the essay into three sections. In the first section he calls attention to common sense mor...

    Read More

  • Immanuel Kant's Work On Grounding For The Metaphysics Of Morals?

    788 Words  | 2 Pages

    Kant starts by explaining the three divisions of philosophy which are: physics, ethics, and logic. He clarifies that physics and ethics are a posteriori while logic is, a priori, but there is a third variable that interacts both which is also the foundation of morals. This is the categorical imperative or also known as the synthetic a priori. The categorical imperative or the moral law is the reason of individuals’ actions. Kant goes on to say “I should never except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (Immanuel Kant, Page14 (line 407-408)). This indicates that an individual should not do anything that is not their own laws or rules that cannot become universal to all individuals. Throughout the Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant defines what categorical imperative is, but also its four distinct articulations.

    Read More

  • Mill’s Objection to Kant’s Moral Theory

    1356 Words  | 3 Pages

    “[Kant] fails… to show that there would be any contradiction, any logical (not to say physical) impossibility, in the adoption by all rational beings of the most outrageously immoral rules of conduct. All he shows is that the consequences of their universal adoption would be such as no one would choose to incur.”

    Read More

  • Reason Vs Hume Essay

    814 Words  | 2 Pages

    Immanuel Kant is a firm believer in the importance “pure” moral philosophy. By “pure”, Kant means the supreme moral principle has to be found using methods of “a priori” moral philosophy, which is grounded on principles that are revealed through operations of reason and are inherent. This is very different from empirical moral philosophy (Hume’s view) because it can indeed show us how we ought to act, not just how we do act. One of Kant’s most distinctive works in ethics was his notion of autonomy. Explicitly, Kant describes autonomy as “the property of the will by which it is a law to itself (independently of any property of the objects volition)” (Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785)). Kant states any moral agent can be autonomous because it gives itself the moral law (so it is self-legislating) and it can prevent or motivate itself to follow the law. This ensures that the moral law is not based in the person’s feelings or impulses, which Kant calls the “proper self”. Kant assumes all non-human animals are heteronomous (the opposite of autonomous) meaning their wills ...

    Read More

  • Kantian Philosophy: Immanuel Kant

    990 Words  | 2 Pages

    Also, another critique is that people would be acting out of moral duty instead of inclination, which is bad. Would you want somebody to do something because they must or because they want to? For example, if you were very sick and your friends came to visit you and they told you they only came because it was their “duty”. That would not feel too good. If we were to follow Kant’s ethics of duty, us people would seem more inhuman since we would only obey absolute rules for duty instead of

    Read More

  • Analysis of Immanuel Kant´s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals

    926 Words  | 2 Pages

    Immanuel Kant is a popular modern day philosopher. He was a modest and humble man of his time. He never left his hometown, never married and never strayed from his schedule. Kant may come off as boring, while he was an introvert but he had a great amount to offer. His thoughts and concepts from the 1700s are still observed today. His most recognized work is from the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Here Kant expresses his idea of ‘The Good Will’ and the ‘Categorical Imperative’.

    Read More

  • Revolution: Locke vs Kant

    2600 Words  | 6 Pages

    ...o be an unbearable abuse of supreme authority” or in the face of governmental tyranny. However, Kant also outlines in his other work the importance of moral autonomy, which seems to betray his view of a citizen's duty to obey. As Arntzen states: “by denying a right of resistance even when civil society falls short of the ideal civil society, he maintains that one has a duty to act according to a will that is not one's own, and thereby seems to betray the person's autonomy and dignity he has so strongly asserted in GMS and KpV” (Arntzen: 1996). Arntzen then goes on to state that Kant must allow

    Read More

  • Kant vs. Mill: Human Rights and Utilitarianism

    1725 Words  | 4 Pages

    Kant’s moral philosophy is very direct in its justification of human rights, especially the ideals of moral autonomy and equality as applied to rational human beings. John Stuart Mills’ theory of utilitarianism also forms a solid basis for human rights, especially his belief that utility is the supreme criterion for judging morality, with justice being subordinate to it. The paper looks at how the two philosophers qualify their teachings as the origins of human rights, and comes to the conclusion that the moral philosophy of Kant is better than that of Mills. Emmanuel Kant Kant’s moral philosophy is built around the formal principles of ethics rather than substantive human goods. He begins by outlining the principles of reasoning that can be equally expected of all rational persons, regardless of their individual desires or partial interests.

    Read More

  • Three Formulations of the Categorical Imperative

    1530 Words  | 4 Pages

    In Kant’s book, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant talks about the three formulations of the categorical imperative. By these formulations, he describes his idea of organizing the moral principle for all rational beings. Kant also talks about the principles of humanity, rational ends, and the “realm of ends” which are constituted by the autonomous freedom of rational beings.

    Read More

  • Autonomy and Self-Reliance: Kant Vs. Emmerson

    1675 Words  | 4 Pages

    In the late eighteenth century, with the publication of his theories on morality, Immanuel Kant revolutionized philosophy in a way that greatly impacted the decades of thinkers after him. The result of his influence led to perceptions and interpretations of his ideas reflected in the works of writers all around the world. Kant’s idealism stems from a claim that moral law, a set of innate rules within each individual, gives people the ability to reason, and it is through this that people attain truth. These innate rules exist in the form of maxims: statements that hold a general truth. Using this, Kant concluded with the idea of autonomy, in which all rational human wills are autonomous, each individual is bound by their own will and in an ideal society, people should operate only according to their reason. Influenced by Kant’s ideas, an american writer by the name of Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote his own call to individual morality through an essay on Self-Reliance. In “Self-Reliance”, Emerson tells individuals to trust in their own judgments, act only according to their own wills, and to use their own judgment to determine what is right. Emerson’s Self-Reliance and Kant’s autonomy differ to the extent of where reason comes from. However, they agree on its purpose in dictating the individual’s judgment and actions. As a result, Autonomy and Self-Reliance have essentially the same message. Both Kant and Emerson agree that the individual should trust only their own reason, that they are bound only by their own free will, and that the actions of an individual should be governed by reason.

    Read More

  • The Metaphysics of Morals by Immanuel Kant

    674 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Section One and Section Two of his work. Kant explores his position on his fundamental principle of morality, or his “categorical imperative”, or his idea that all actions are moral and “good” if they are performed as a duty. Such an idea is exemplified when he says, “I should never act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (Kant 14). The philosopher uses examples such as suicide and helping others in distress to apply his principal to possible real life situation. Kant is successful in regards to both issues. As a result, it means that categorical imperative can plausibly be understood as the fundamental principle of all morality. Kant’s reasoning for his categorical imperative is written in a way that makes the theory out to be very plausible.

    Read More

  • Business Ethics Case Study: Hacking Into Harvard

    523 Words  | 2 Pages

    Kant believed that morality has to be something free and freely controlled by the person taking the moral action excluding consequences because consequences are not controllable. Morality is freely chosen and legislated universal law that any rational being could construct and all rational beings who want to be moral do

    Read More

  • Kant's Categorical Imperative

    1532 Words  | 4 Pages

    If we desire X, we ought to do Y. However, categorical imperatives are not subject to conditions. The Categorical Imperative is universally binding to all rational creatures because they are rational. Kant proposes three formulations: the Categorical Imperative in his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morality, the Universal Law formulation, Humanity or End in Itself formulation, and Kingdom of Ends formulation. In this essay, the viability of the Universal Law formulation is tested by discussing two objections to it, mainly the idea that the moral laws are too absolute and the existence of false positives and false negatives.

    Read More

  • Good Will By Immanuel Kant

    972 Words  | 2 Pages

    Immanuel Kant was a philosopher who made great contributions with his work on the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Kant’s interest with metaphysics left him in the company of Aristotle, who had the original work on metaphysics. Kant’s goal in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals was to find and make the supreme principal of morality. Kant covers several concepts in his work on metaphysics, some of the key concepts in his work are good will, moral worth, and imperatives. When it comes to good will Kant believes that “Nothing in the world—indeed nothing even beyond the world—can possibly be conceived which could be called good without qualification except a good will” 1. In the next key concept, moral worth, Kant believes that actions are only morally right depending on their motives, “an action done not from inclination but from duty” 2 is morally right according to Kant. Kant’s imperatives are broken down into two types, those being hypothetical and categorical. A hypothetical imperative is an “action that is good to some purpose, possible or actual” 3. A categorical imperative “directly commands a certain conduct without making its condition some purpose to be reached by it” 4. From these concepts you can tell that Kant is a perfect world philosopher who thinks that all humans are rational beings, who have preeminent good in them, and should always strive to be their best selves.

    Read More

  • Immanuel Kant And John Stuart Mill

    2613 Words  | 6 Pages

    To understand Kant’s account of freedom and autonomy one should have a general picture of his moral philosophy. A moral philosophy based so heavily on autonomy, that it if fair to establish that Kant’s morality and freedom reciprocally imply one another. First, Kant holds that there is a single fundamental principle of morality, one that is absolutely necessary, on which all specific moral duties are based. This moral law is what is referred to as the categorical imperative. According to Kant imperatives are formulas for determining an action that is necessary according to a will that is good in some way. All imperatives can command either hypothetically o...

    Read More

More about Autonomous Thinking and Immanuel Kant

Open Document