Essay On Reason By Immanuel Kant

Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, written by Immanuel Kant is commenced with Kant’s notion, “It is impossible to think of anything at all in the world, or indeed even beyond it, that could be taken to be good without limitation, except a good will.” Thereby, Kant argues that morality, which according to him is contextually synonymous with the term “good,” lies both unrestrictedly (“without limitation”) and indisputably (“it is impossible to think of anything…”) within good will. Perhaps the phrase “good will” is unsatisfactorily vague, at least concerning Kant’s intended definition of good will. Accordingly, subsequent to Kant’s commencing expression, he notes that “understanding, wit, judgement,” and other “talents of the mind,” including

Thereafter, it is imperative to both investigate and uncover the meaning of reason. Preliminarily, Kant notes that reason is designated for organisms that are “most fitting,” and “most suitable,” i.e., organisms that are incapable of reason aren’t applicable to his argument. As a disclaimer Kant disproves mankind’s purpose as one that is incessantly seeking happiness; because, happiness is predominantly obtained by fulfilling inclinations; so, optimally, instinctual reactions would take precedence deeming reason useless. In fact, reason is seemingly inefficient under these circumstances – the further one perseveres into a quest to acquire happiness, the more hardships, responsibilities and burdens are manifested. For example, Kant notes that scientific advancements which “appear to them (scientists) to be a luxury of the understanding,” almost always prompt more hardships and responsibilities as extrapolations. Bearing in mind that reason doesn’t accommodate happiness, or the satisfaction of our pleasure-yielding inclinations (“For since reason is not sufficiently fit to guide the will reliably with regard to its objects and the satisfaction of all our

The concept of duty is threefold. Firstly, Actions that merely duplicate, or “conform” to duty are undutiful, because they concede to inclination of sorts. By way of illustration, Kant notes that a suicidal man who spreads joy in an attempt to receive “praise and encouragement,” which will perhaps ease the symptoms of depression, is not obedient to duty (because he is not spreading happiness for the sake of spreading happiness). Oppositely, if this particular man did not reap any benefits from those whom he induced joy into, he would be acting dutifully. Secondly, “an action from duty has its moral worth not in the purpose that is to be attained by it, but in the maxim according to which it is resolved upon;” simply, consequences and repercussions are both insignificant and meaningless regarding good will – it is one’s intentions that are of utmost importance concerning good will. For instance, suppose a given person intends on scrupulously aiding a feeble, aged woman across a crosswalk; but, both unexpectedly and unfortunately, this hypothetical person nudges the elderly woman’s walker and she falls. Circumstantially, the person who sought to help the old woman has simply confronted an accident, he or she did not intentionally cause this elderly woman to fall. Lastly, “duty is the necessity of an action from respect for the law” –