Kantian Deontology

1196 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Why is kantian ethics better than utilitarianism

Kantian deontology is an ethical theory that was developed by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. The founding principle of this theory is known as the categorical imperative. Within the Kantian categorical imperative, there are two fundamental formulations to be observed. The first formulation is specified as, “Act only on that maxim which you can at the same time will that it should become universal law.” In other words, one should consider if an action is right or wrong by asking themselves if they would endorse that action. The second formulation is stated as, “Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end.” In …show more content…

In this case, Fred, a former spy agent, has an extremely ill wife that needs a specific drug to survive. However, the drug is beyond the financial limits of Fred and his wife, so they cannot afford to buy it. There is, coincidently, a wealthy man that owns a local pharmacy that happens to have an excess amount of the drug Fred needs for his wife. Unfortunately, Fred cannot get the owner to decrease the price of the drug. The dilemma found in Case 3 pertains to whether or not Fred should steal an expensive drug for his extremely ill wife. Analyzing this dilemma from a Kantian perspective, one would reach the verdict that Fred cannot be morally just if he steals the drug. To determine this verdict, one must take into account the perfect duties Fred has a person, as well as Kant’s categorical imperative. Fred would infringe upon his perfect duty to not steal by taking the drug and perfect duties are not to be violated under any circumstances. In addition, if he were to steal the drug from the owner, he would be using the owner as a mere means, rather than an end. For these reasons, according to this theory, stealing from the wealthy pharmacy owner is strictly impermissible because it not only transgresses against a perfect duty, but also fails to respect the owner as a person. Kantian deontology would likely recommend that Fred seek alternative options. For instance, he could …show more content…

Personally, I find the recommendations for to be sufficiently reasonable. While Fred appears to have already tried a number of legal methods to obtain his wife’s medication, he has not fully exhausted every alternative. For instance, the GoFundMe option: social media is extremely effective and convenient for raising money, especially in somber situations like that found in Case 3. Due to this, I am almost certain he would succeed in raising enough money for the drug. One might argue that this method contradicts the Kantian notion that one shall not treat others as a mere means. While it is true that Fred would be using people as a means by asking them for money, he would not be forcing anyone to contribute to his cause. Therefore, he would not be treating them as mere means because they would voluntarily give to his cause. On the chance that this method fails, he could sell his vehicle or other valuables. Still, even after exploring all of the recommendations, there is a possibility that Fred could fail to get the drug for his wife, whether that be due to a lack of funds or insufficient time. In that instance, Kantian deontology states Fred must accept his situation and not steal the drug because doing so would transgress against a perfect duty and contradict the categorical imperative by not

Show More
Related

  • Kant Vs Mill on the Issue of Lying

    1763 Words  | 4 Pages

    Firstly, by looking at the first patient, whether she gets a kidney from her father or a “cadaver kidney” , there will be no difference because she needs a kidney nonetheless. The second patient however, cannot agree to give his kidney away because one of the main reasons is that he’s scared and lacks “the courage to make this donation”9. So right at this point, it can be seen that it would be better if the father didn’t give his kidney away because it wouldn’t cause him any happiness, whereas the daughter has two options to gIn everyday life, whether on a personal base or on a professional base, difficult scenarios, or also known as moral dilemmas, are present. Depending on whom the person is or what their belief and value systems are, the issue can be ‘resolved’. In this particular case, questions arise about whether it is morally right to lie to family members when something can be done, ignoring the fact of its after effects. The case will be explained in details later on including the patient’s state, but to answer this ethical question, two theorists will be presented for the con and pro side. For the con side, the deontologist Immanuel Kant will be presented with his theory that lying is prohibited under all circumstances, as for the pro side, John Stuart Mill will be presented for the utilitarian theory stating that whichever decision brings out the most happiness is the right decision. After discussing the case, my personal view of what is right will be stated with my own reasons, which is that lying is the right decision to be taken.

    Read More

  • Case Analysis: Case Study: If Looks Could Kill

    1269 Words  | 3 Pages

    Deontology is when an action is considered morally good because of the action itself not the product of the action ("Deontological Ethics"). When applying Kant’s theory one also has to take into account the two aspects in determining what exactly the right thing in any situation is. They include universality and respect for persons. Universality states that you must “act only on that maxim which you can at the same time will to be a universal law”(Manias). Respect for person’s states that one must “act so that you treat humanity, weather in your own person or that of another; always as an end and never as a means only” (Manias). With this being said one must apply both of these to any option they are

    Read More

  • Kant's Theory of Deontology and Euthanasia

    472 Words  | 1 Pages

    I am going to apply the theory of Kant’s Deontology to the case regarding assisted suicide for psychological suffering.

    Read More

  • Ethical Ethics And Deontology

    1408 Words  | 3 Pages

    Deontology refers to the judgment of the morality of an action based on the action’s adherence to a rule or rules. The first philosopher to define deontological principles was Immanuel Kant, who had founded critical philosophy. Kant held that nothing is good without the actual intent being good, and if one acts in accordance with the law, rather than what he thinks. He saw moral law as an unconditioned command and believed it should be established by human reason alone. Even now, with accordance to the law, people are bound to do things within the law, and following the law is considered ethical.

    Read More

  • Ethics in Nursing

    1924 Words  | 4 Pages

    Deontology is an ethical theory concerned with duties and rights. The founder of deontological ethics was a German philosopher named Immanuel Kant. Kant’s deontological perspective implies people are sensitive to moral duties that require or prohibit certain behaviors, irrespective of the consequences (Tanner, Medin, & Iliev, 2008). The main focus of deontology is duty: deontology is derived from the Greek word deon, meaning duty. A duty is morally mandated action, for instance, the duty never to lie and always to keep your word. Based on Kant, even when individuals do not want to act on duty they are ethically obligated to do so (Rich, 2008).

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism vs. Kantianism

    1353 Words  | 3 Pages

    Immanuel Kant's deonotological ethical theory assesses if actions are moral based on the person's will or intention of acting. Kant's theory can be categorized as a deonotological because "actions are not assessed to be morally permissible on the basis of consequences they produce, but rather on the form of the agent's will in acting," (Dodds, Lecture 7) therefore his actions are based on duty and not consequential. Kantianism is based on three principles: maxims, willing, and the categorical imperative. Kant states that a maxim is a "general rule or principle which will explain what a person takes himself to be doing and the circumstances in which he takes himself to be doing it" (Feldman, 1999, 201). It is important that this principle be universalisable and that the maxim can be applied consistently to everyone that encounters similar situations, therefore willed as a universal law. The second aspect of Kant's theory is willing. This involves the agent consistently committing oneself to make an action occur. He states that, "In general, we can say that a person wills inconsistently if he wills that p be the case and he wills that q be the case and its impossible for p and q to be the case together" (Feldman, 1999, 203). T...

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Nietzsche And Kant's Theory Of Ethics

    1054 Words  | 3 Pages

    Immanuel Kant’s theory of ethics is rooted in deontology. Describing Kant’s ethics as deontological means that they are derivative of mankind’s moral duty. For Kant, this critical component of ethics is an extension of Hume’s fork as it creates a third category, which is synthetic Apriori. This category is comprised of math, ethics and causality. His rules-based ethics revolves around the good will, as deontology in its nature revolves around adhering to the rules. Kant says that intelligence is great by nature, but means very little unless you apply them in virtuous and good will. In order for something to be truly good, it must be intrinsically good and without qualification.

    Read More

  • Essay On Ethical Lens Inventory

    1718 Words  | 4 Pages

    Deontological ethics are “ethical theories that place special emphasis on the relationship between duty and the morality of human actions” (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2018). This viewpoint focuses more on the action itself rather than the outcome. Per Kant’s Categorical Imperative one should “so act that you treat humanity in your own person and in the person of everyone else always at the same time as an end and never merely as means” (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2018). An example of this is that killing is wrong, even if it is in self-defense. Many of the values and morals of the ELI Responsibilities Lens are based on the deontological

    Read More

  • Deontological Moral Theory

    1228 Words  | 3 Pages

    Deontological moral theory is a Non-Consequentialist moral theory. While consequentialists believe the ends always justify the means, deontologists assert that the rightness of an action is not simply dependent on maximizing the good, if that action goes against what is considered moral. It is the inherent nature of the act alone that determines its ethical standing. For example, imagine a situation where there are four critical condition patients in a hospital who each need a different organ in order to survive. Then, a healthy man comes to the doctor’s office for a routine check-up. According to consequentialism, not deontology, the doctor should and must sacrifice that one man in order to save for others. Thus, maximizing the good. However, deontological thought contests this way of thinking by contending that it is immoral to kill the innocent despite the fact one would be maximizing the good. Deontologists create concrete distinctions between what is moral right and wrong and use their morals as a guide when making choices. Deontologists generate restrictions against maximizing the good when it interferes with moral standards. Also, since deontologists place a high value on the individual, in some instances it is permissible not to maximize the good when it is detrimental to yourself. For example, one does not need to impoverish oneself to the point of worthlessness simply to satisfy one’s moral obligations. Deontology can be looked at as a generally flexible moral theory that allows for self-interpretation but like all others theories studied thus far, there are arguments one can make against its reasoning.

    Read More

  • Cyber Security, Ethics, And Ethics

    1447 Words  | 3 Pages

    Kant theory is saying that everyone must do things for the right reasons. According to Deontological ethics theory, an action is considered favourable sometimes because of some good aspect of action in itself without considering its good result from the action. This theory is much based upon the one’s morals and values which expresses the “sake of duty” and virtue. Deontology tells us to be fair and not to take advantage of others while teleology tells about doing whatever we want and it gives us a result that is good to us. [17]

    Read More

  • The Dark Knight: Utilitarianism Or Deontology?

    1179 Words  | 3 Pages

    Deontology in Immanuel Kant’s point of view is all about duty and not inclination of morality. For example, the First Proposition of Morality is an action that must be done from duty to have moral worth (298). In other words, if one were feeling generous and wanted to give money to the ones who really need it, this technically would not be moral worthy according to Kant. The reason why for this is because that person did not do it out of duty but instead out of free will. For one’s action to have moral worth, it could be an example of one going to work everyday. Everyone has their own specific job to do at work and that is their duty. All in all, Kant views that deontology must come from an action of duty in order for it to be moral worthy and it is not the consequences that determines what is right or wrong.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism And Kant's Ethical Theory On Duty

    1093 Words  | 3 Pages

    Deontological ethical theory focuses on duty. It is viewed that humans have a duty in doing what is ethically right in any given situation. However, the categorical imperative does not have the same ideas it does not consist of duties to us. As Kant indicates in the idea of the Kingdom of Ends that our duty lies in treating all human beings as ends in and of them instead of as a means to an end it is perceived as being an extension of us. It is based on the desires of a person on how they want to be treated and will succeed as long as the universal good is applied as well. In other words, our actions and behaviors applied in our lives, we can see others imitating. For instance, can we see a world where everyone lied willingly? It does not make sense it would defeat the purpose of being able to identify the truth there would be no meaning. The ethical duty is to be truthful.

    Read More

  • Kant's Categorical Imperative

    1532 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Kant and Deontological Theory

    1240 Words  | 3 Pages

    Immanuel Kant was a moral philosopher. His theory, better known as deontological theory, holds that intent, reason, rationality, and good will are motivating factors in the ethical decision making process. The purpose of this paper is to describe and explain major elements of his theory, its essential points, how it is used in the decision making process, and how it intersects with the teams values.

    Read More

  • Deontology Versus Kant's Ideas

    1631 Words  | 4 Pages

    I am going to argue why it is okay to tell as small lie to a friend in order to spare their feelings. I am going to touch on two ethical models, these being, Utilitarianism and Deontology. The individual that is a Utilitarian is Jeremy Bentham and the Deontologist is Immanuel Kant. I will be sharing their ideas and explaining why Jeremy Bentham’s ideas are more defensible than Kant’s ideas. I believe that if you are a good friend, it is important for you to keep the most optimal happiness between your friends and yourself. With Bentham's theory, Utilitarianism, the overall goal is to make the most people happy (Bentham 1). If the storyline of a lie is what makes the most people happy, Benthem says it is okay to lie. For Kant, a person is never

    Read More

More about Kantian Deontology

Open Document