Deontology is an ethical theory of philosophy based in the non-consequentialist tree of ethics. Deontology’s major founder was Immanuel Kant, whose work was done near the end of the eighteenth century. Kant’s contributions to metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics were enormous, and is thus considered to be one of the most prominent minds in the history of western thought. Kant was a product of the modern philosophy, and his own theories were in many ways a reaction to the two opposing schools of philosophy at the time, Empiricism and Rationalism, which differed in the nature of their epistemological foundations. Kant’s answers to these two movements, such as his notions of a priori knowledge and how the mind constitutes fundamental parts of …show more content…
His first formulation is this: Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction. Thus there are two types of duties that one can formulate. There is a perfect duty, which is the duty to not develop maxims, or moral laws that would logically contradict themselves if universally implemented. A maxim that would not qualify as a perfect duty would be one such as, “Thou shalt steal other’s property”. The counterproof to this is that if it were okay to steal other’s property, the concept of property wouldn’t really exist, and thus the maxim is contradictory, and cannot be a perfect duty. There are also imperfect duties, or duties that are based on subjective likings of different people, and are also subjective to situations. One cannot be derided for not fulfilling an imperfect duty. An imperfect maxim developed in the novel The Lord of the Rings would be as follows: If one is a hobbit and one happens across the One Ring, one should take it to Mount Doom to destroy it. The main character certainly could not be blamed or scorned for not fulfilling the task, but it is praiseworthy that he completed the
...to lie on occasion as result of better results or to not harm the other person. For example, if a teenager does not tell his parents he snuck out and drove their car then he avoids punishment if he simply says he never went out. Also, if a girl does not like the dress her friend is wearing but still says she does, then she lies for the benefit of her friend rather than causing harm. Although people still lie, they are still able to act morally in accordance with universal law. Overall, I believe it depends on the circumstances and individual on whether or not humans are obligated to act morally because morality is for the sake of the individual while obligation would be for the sake of others or the community. As a result, rather than a moral “obligation” to act, it should be replaced by desire so that people would want to act a certain way instead of feeling forced.
What he is also saying in this passage is that one’s actions in such a situation should be selfless. One should not do good deeds for his or her own personal benefit. He or she should be doing so because it is his or her own personal duty.
Deontology is the ethical view that some actions are morally forbidden or permitted regardless of consequences. One of the most influential deontological philosophers in history is Immanuel Kant who developed the idea of the Categorical Imperative. Kant believed that the only thing of intrinsic moral worth is a good will. Kant says in his work Morality and Rationality “The good will is not good because of what it affects or accomplishes or because of it’s adequacy to achieve some proposed end; it is good only because of it’s willing, i.e., it is good of itself”. A maxim is the generalized rule that characterizes the motives for a person’s actions. For Kant, a will that is good is one that is acting by the maxim of doing the right thing because it is right thing to do. The moral worth of an action is determined by whether or not it was acted upon out of respect for the moral law, or the Categorical Imperative. Imperatives in general imply something we ought to do however there is a distinction between categorical imperatives and hypothetical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives are obligatory so long as we desire X. 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 Moral, the Universal Law formulation, Humanity or End in Itself formulation, and Kingdom of Ends formulation. In this essay, the viablity 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.
Kantian Deontology is a diverse and widely-accepted theory of ethics in which consequences of human actions do not matter. Instead, the theory focuses on intentions, acting from a sense to fulfill duty and how we treat one another. The core of Kantian Deontology is the Categorical Imperative, which is Immanuel Kant’s conclusive principle of morality. The Categorical Imperative has two forms, both of which are cited by Rachels & Rachels from Kant’s Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals. The second form of the Categorical Imperative is best supported by the evidence observed by Rachels & Rachels, which mandates that people treat one another only as an end, and never as a means.