Kantian Ethics

853 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Kants theory of deontology

An overall goal of ethics is determining the morality of the human kind and judging their actions as good or bad. One of the many strategies of this goal is called deontological ethics founded by Immanuel Kant. Kant focused on an individual’s motives and judged them on the fundamentals of good will, duty, and universality. He believed that if an action does not have these structural foundations, then the actions are unworthy to claim good moral. Kant also created formulations in order to help decide whether if an action of duty is considerable for judgment. Kant’s emphasis on the motive of an action has many pros in comparison to the utilitarianism strategy of judging on the amount of happiness created. There are many flaws in considering the consequence of an action, while there are no flaws when considering the purity of good will in a person’s motive. Kant’s deontological theory of judging actions by an individual’s motives is the most fair and accurate evaluation of good moral.
Immanuel Kant developed a moral theory on the sole perspective of a person’s motive or intent of their action. Kant does not believe that the consequences and outcomes of a person’s action define how morally right it is. He focuses only on the reasoning and puts these intentions into a duty and good will definition. The studying and emphasis on morality being based on duty is why we call Kant’s theory deontological. When a person does an action out of duty, it is because the duty is something a person is ought to do, deeming the action to be morally worthy. This goes the same for the intention of good will. When a person does an action out of good will, it is because the action is simply the right thing to do or good thing to do (85). Kant goes to the ...

... middle of paper ...

...ple given where the complimented individual controls the fate of the situation by reacting offended. This uncontrollable factor can even be explained in a better example that a human cannot control Mother Nature. If a doctor is trying to save a woman who is in the deadly stages of cancer, the doctor’s action of trying to save her life should not be determined as morally wrong or unworthy because Mother Nature’s course and science caused the woman to pass. When judging an individual’s moral, it is not fair to burden their actions by the consequences created by a third party that they cannot control. This is why Kant’s theory of judging one individual’s motive influencing one individual’s action is the more fair approach compared to utilitarian beliefs.

Works Cited

MacKinnon, Barbara. Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub., 1995. Print.

Show More
Related

  • Virtue Ethics: Deontological and Eudaimonist

    4530 Words  | 10 Pages

    There are two basic types of ethical judgments: deontological judgements that focus on duty and obligation and eudaimonist judgements that focus on human excellence and the nature of the good life. I contend that we must carefully distinguish these two types of judgement and not try to understand one as a special case of the other. Ethical theories may be usefully divided into two main kinds, deontological or eudaimonist, on the basis of whether they take one of the other of these types of judgement as primary. A second important contention, which this paper supports but does not attempt to justify fully, is that neither type of theory trumps the other, nor should we subsume them under some more encompassing ethical synthesis.

    Read More

  • Deontology and Utilitarianism: Ethical Theories for Nurses

    1121 Words  | 3 Pages

    German philosopher Immanuel Kant popularized the philosophy of deontology, which is described as actions that are based on obligation rather than personal gain or happiness (Rich & Butts, 2014). While developing his theory, Kant deemed two qualities that are essential for an action to be deemed an ethical. First, he believed it was never acceptable to sacrifice freedom of others to achieve a desired goal. In other words, he believed in equal respect for all humans. Each human has a right for freedom and justice, and if an action takes away the freedom of another, it is no longer ethical or morally correct. Secondly, he held that good will is most important, and that what is good is not determined by the outcome of the situation but by the action made (Johnson, 2008). In short, he simply meant that the consequences of a situation do not matter, only the intention of an action. Kant also declared that for an act to be considered morally correct, the act must be driven by duty alone. By extension, there could be no other motivation such as lo...

    Read More

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

    926 Words  | 2 Pages

    The concept Kant is displaying in his work is the universal maxim. He believes in the idea of the will of every human being to be a part of the universal law. Individuals are to reflect upon their action by looking at the motivating principle behind their action. The question is would the motivation of my action be universally accepted or rejected? Kant is saying that we should look at the motivating principle behind our actions and compare that to how it would be seen on a universal level. Then ask, would we want another person to act with the same motivating principle? In all we are to act in a manner that the will of our action be a maxim that becomes a universal law.

    Read More

  • Kantian Morality

    1061 Words  | 3 Pages

    permissible for a person to act in that manner by seeing if it would be

    Read More

  • Kant Morality

    853 Words  | 2 Pages

    In order to act, one must have will, which is the determination of the mind to act. Kant argues that we need good will because it is not only good in itself but to develop it, we also must have reason behind it. According to Kant, one’s personal will is only good if they are motivated by nothing other than duty. Kant argues that to fulfill our moral obligations, we must act from duty and offers three essential principles. The first proposition states that an action must be done from duty in order to have moral worth. Therefore we must act from duty rather than act in accordance with duty because then our action would not be morally worthy. The second proposition, maxims, states that an action done from duty has moral worth in the maxim that guides it. Kant clearly proposes that an action must be done for its own sake instead of the sake for anything else, “an action from duty h...

    Read More

  • KANTIANISM AS THE TRUE ACCOUNT OF MORALITY

    1446 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this paper, I will argue that Kantianism, not utilitarianism, is the true account of morality. Utilitarianism is based on measuring happiness, but this is not something that can be objectively quantified. It is also a theory that bases the morality of an action on its future consequences, which cannot be accurately predicted. Lastly, a society governed by Kantianism would, possibly, produce greater total happiness than a society governed by utilitarianism.

    Read More

  • Gone Baby Gone Analysis

    1140 Words  | 3 Pages

    Kant explores the good will which acts for duty’s sake, or the sole unconditional good. A good will is not good because of any proposed end, or because of what it accomplishes, but it is only good in itself. The good will that is good without qualification contains both the means and the end in itself.

    Read More

  • Immanuel Kant's The Quinlan Case

    1386 Words  | 3 Pages

    What is ethics? Ethics are the philosophical principles of good verses bad moral behavior. It is a guideline to help people make decisions or make a judgment calls. There are two main types of ethical principles that will be discussed in this paper, and how they are applied to the decision making process. They are Deontological and Utilitarian. Deontological ethics are based on the righteousness or wrongness of the action-taking place. It does not base itself on the bad or good consequences that come from the action. Immanuel Kant introduced deontological ethics in the 18th century. Kant believed that every decision or action made by a person had to be evaluated by his or her moral duty. He stated that humanity shouldn’t side on its

    Read More

  • Metaphysics of Morals

    1153 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Bernard Williams's Critique Of Kantian Moral Theory

    1104 Words  | 3 Pages

    Critiques of Kantian moralist theory such as Williams believe that Kant’s moral theory is characterized by Impartiality and unresponsiveness to any picky associations to picky person. Abstraction from specific characteristics of an agent is what is believed by the critiques as to be a qualification for a universal moral principle that can apply to similar

    Read More

  • Case Study Of Kant's Deontology

    1113 Words  | 3 Pages

    Over the course of this essay, I will present the reader with information on Kant’s Deontology, including, but not limited to, explaining how Immanuel Kant discerns what is morally right and morally wrong. I will then apply these criterion to case number two, and attempt to accurately portray what Kant’s Deontology dictates is the morally correct response. Following this determination, I will show the reader that although Kant’s moral reasoning will lead us to a definitive answer, we should not be so quick to accept it. Interestingly enough, he seems to lead us to what would generally be the correct answer, but perhaps not in the given circumstance and not for the right reason.

    Read More

  • Kant and Deontological Theory

    1240 Words  | 3 Pages

    While Kant’s theory may seem “overly optimistic” (Johnson, 2008) now, it was ruled as acceptable and rational behavior then. Kant believed that any moral or ethical decision could be achieved with consistent behavior. While judgment was based on reason, morals were based on rational choices made by human beings (Freeman, 2000). A human’s brain is the most advanced in the animal kingdom. Not only do human beings work on instinct, but they have the ability to sort out situations in order to make a decision. This includes weighing the pros and cons of decisions that could be made and how they affect others either positively or negatively. This is called rational thought. Kant believed that any human being able to rationalize a decision before it was made had the ability to be a morally just person (Freeman, 2000). There were certain things that made the decision moral, and he called it the “Categorical Imperative” (Johnson, 2008). If someone was immoral they violated this CI and were considered irrational. The CI is said to be an automatic response which was part of Kant’s argument that all people were deserving of respect. This automatic response to rational thinking is where he is considered, now, to be “overly optimistic” (Johnson, 2008).

    Read More

  • Essay On Grounding For The Metaphysics Of Morality By Immanuel Kant

    1400 Words  | 3 Pages

    Kant believes the morality of our action doesn’t depend on the consequences because consequences are beyond our control. According to him, what determines the morality of action is the motivation behind the action and that is called will. Kant states that there is anything “which can be regarded as good without qualification, except a good will” (7). He suggests other traits such as courage, intelligence, and fortunes and possessions such as fortune, health, and power are not good in themselves because such traits and possessions can be used to accomplish bad things if the actions are not done out of goodwill. Thus, the good motivation is the only good that is good in itself. It is the greatest good that we can have. Then, the question that arises is how do we produce good will? Kant claims that our pure reason

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism vs. Kantianism

    1353 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    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

More about Kantian Ethics

Open Document