Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The major theory of ethics
Paper on ethics
Ethical theories introduction to ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Throughout time we have seen western philosophy influenced by the difference between reason and experience as the foundation of principle knowledge. Two main philosophical strands that provide the back bone for this difference are rationalism and empiricism. Rationalism will show that there are synthetic a priori statements, something to be known without reference to experience, that meaningful facts about the world can be discovered by rational, non-empirical means. Empiricists aim to show that these a priori facts are analytical, where it doesn’t give any more information that is not stated in the original terms involved. After understanding the basis that forces us to look which is better for ethics, reason or experience, we have to lay out what these factors provide. A question to think about is, do you need to have a reason in order to be involved with a certain experience?
The main focus of Kant’s system of ethics is to derive the moral law from reason. Following this focus the immorality that is involved is inconsistent and in the end irrational. According to Kantian ethics, there are two important implications that ties in reason to Kant’s view on ethics. His use of reason is to help provide a response to the egoists, who focuses on the act of our own self-interest. A second implication that Kant uses reason for is to explain the scope of morality. There is a reason why Kant wants to focus on our own self-interest because if you can be successful on your own the experiences that relate should be successful as well. As a society we cannot fully rely on the single well-being to make all the changes necessary in life. Mackinnon states that when we are looking at the right or wrong of a situation we appeal to certain norms...
... middle of paper ...
... if you fill your life with a lot of reason and little experience you will end up with nothing happening. Finding the overall balance between reason and experience will make you the person you want to be.
To conclude, over time we have seen many philosophers such as Kant and Descartes that emphasized their theories and thought to shape the world we live in today. These notable people have created the stepping stones for people to conquer their dreams in a positive ethical sense. We all have different thoughts about the ethical world, but that is what makes everyone different. You cannot have the same experiences as someone else, and feel like you will become a better person. This is because each person is different, and will take different values out of each experience they are involved in. They will also be involved with these experiences for different reasons.
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...
In this paper, I will argue that Kant provides us with a plausible account of morality. To demonstrate that, I will initially offer a main criticism of Kantian moral theory, through explaining Bernard Williams’ charge against it. I will look at his indulgent of the Kantian theory, and then clarify whether I find it objectionable. The second part, I will try to defend Kant’s theory.
Immanuel Kant is one of the renowned representatives of German modern philosophy which was predominantly built on the philosophical concepts of human right, mind, morals and the importance of ownership. His central concept is reason and philosophical epistemology is based not only on theoretical, but also combined with the empirical aspects, which refers to the practical philosophy that covers from human behavior to human action. Generally speaking, the practical philosophy deals with the ground concept that relates to the human deliberative action. In the “Critique of Pure Reason” says that there is only congenital right, the independence which is the right to be detached from the other’s interest. Kant’s
Human beings are tempted. One is generally in a conflict between the realm or morality and immorality. At times, one disregards reason as the intended result was not what one wanted. One can conclude that reason is justified in situations where one expects to be treated morally and will treat others morally. Essentially, Kant expects all human beings to be able to reason. Reason is the justification to morality. One who reasons asserts the beliefs of morality. One can conclude that reason is absolute. Immorality is based on one’s personal desires. Reason cannot be coincided with immorality, since each party is not treated morally. Reason is universal, since each individual expects to be treated morally and will treat others morally. It is applicable to all entities. The Categorical Imperative establishes the ideal that one should act from maxims that are universalized. This ideal leads to the Formula of Humanity; individuals of morality seek to live under the law in which one’s self-worth is protected. One should act from maxims in which order is applicable to
In this paper, I will critique Kantian ethic’s failure to defend beings disputably labeled “irrational.” The concept of a rational being is a common motif throughout Immanuel Kant’s “Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals.” These beings comprise the foundation of his entire argument. Therefore, for the purpose of this essay, it is crucial to further examine what is meant by “rational.” Kant offers three essential requirements that separate rational beings from their irrational counterparts; the ability to reason, a moral will, and autonomy (53, 49, 41.) Rational beings are those included in his ideal “kingdom of ends” (39.) He defines this kingdom as “a systematic union of rational beings through common objective law” (39.) Since Kant’s code of ethics only applies to those deemed rational, some fundamental questions remain ambiguous. Firstly, in what manner should Kant’s higher capacity beings interact with those “incapable” of reason? Could those who fail to meet the three requirements be abused or exploited? Would this be justified? Some may conclude that Kant has evaded these inquiries altogether.
On the 1st of November 2013, I performed my first simulation on the module, Foundation Skills for Nursing. This simulation was on checking for vital signs in patients particularly, measuring the blood pressure (BP) which is the force of blood vessels against the walls of the vessels (Marieb and Hoehn, 2010). We also measured the temperature, pulse and respiratory (TPR) rates of a patient. This simulation’s objective was to engage us in practising some basic observation techniques taken on patients in and out of hospitals and to familiarise us on some of the tasks we will be performing when in practise. I will be applying the “What”, “So what”, and “Now what” model of reflection in nursing by Driscoll (2000).
Whilst discussing the basics of moral philosophy, every philosopher will undoubtedly come across the works of Immanuel Kant and David Hume. As they progress into the thoughts of these two famous philosophers they will notice the stark contrast between the pair. Quite simply put, Kant’s works emphasizes that reason is the main source of human being’s morality, while Hume’s work depicts human desire as the driving source of morality. Obviously these two points of view are very different, but it is difficult to say which of these philosophers are more correct than the other.
In Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant argues that human beings inherently have capability to make purely rational decisions that are not based on inclinations and such rational decisions prevent people from interfering with freedom of another. Kant’s view of inherent ability to reason brings different perspective to ways which human beings can pursue morality thus it requires a close analytical examination.
Ethics can be defined as "the conscious reflection on our moral beliefs with the aim of improving, extending or refining those beliefs in some way." (Dodds, Lecture 2) Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism are two theories that attempt to answer the ethical nature of human beings. This paper will attempt to explain how and why Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism differ as well as discuss why I believe Kant's theory provides a more plausible account of ethics.
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. It creates an ideal universal community of rational individuals who can collectively agree on the moral principles for guiding equality and autonomy. This is what forms the basis for contemporary human rig...
Through his discussion of morals in the Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant explores the question of whether a human being is capable of acting solely out of pure duty and if our actions hold true moral value. In passage 407, page 19, Kant proposes that if one were to look at past experiences, one cannot be certain that his or her rationalization for performing an action that conforms with duty could rest solely on moral grounds. In order to fully explain the core principle of moral theory, Kant distinguishes between key notions such as a priori and a posteriori, and hypothetical imperative vs. categorical imperative, in order to argue whether the actions of rational beings are actually moral or if they are only moral because of one’s hidden inclinations.
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.
...efs of empiricists have explained that people use experiences to understand the world around them. Meanwhile, rationalists have explained that through reason the fundamentals of knowledge can be understood. Kant’s epistemological philosophy has revolutionized philosophy as we know it today. Kant showed that the mind, through its innate categories, constructs our experience along a space-time principle. Therefore, Kant’s theory that true knowledge is obtained by reasoning based upon previous sense experiences seems to adequately address the problems evident in the controversy between rationalism and empiricism.
The importance of experience in education has always been the subject of philosophical debates. These debates between empiricists and rationalists have been going on for quite some time. Rationalists are of the view that knowledge acquired through senses is unreliable and learning can only be done through reasoning. On the other hand, empiricists believe knowledge is acquired through empirical impressions and concepts that cannot be learnt without being experienced (Evans, 1992, p. 35). This debate was however resolved by Kant who argues that both experience and rationality are necessary in learning. John Dewey was an American philosopher of the twentieth century and he also contributed to the debate on the learning process. In his book Experience and Education, Dewey (1938), he stated, “the belief that all genuine education comes about through experience does not mean that all experiences are genuinely or equally educative” (p. 25). This famous quote has been evaluated and referred to regularly in the debate on learning through experience.
Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with the theory of knowledge. Epistemology studies the nature of knowledge, justification, and the rationality of belief. Much of the debate in epistemology centers on four areas: the philosophical analysis of the nature of knowledge and how it relates to such concepts as truth, belief, and justification, various problems of skepticism, the sources and scope of knowledge and justified belief, and the criteria for knowledge and justification. Epistemology addresses such questions as "What makes justified beliefs justified?", "What does it mean to say that we know something?" and fundamentally "How do we know that we know?"