Kantian Ethics and Christian Ethics

1407 Words3 Pages

Kantian Ethics and Christian Ethics
Immanuel Kant the founder of the "Categorical Imperative" (CI) argues that morality is based on standards of rationality. Therefore, to act in disaccord with the CI is to act irrationally or immorally. In comparison to Christianity, to act immorally is to act in disagreement with God's laws. Kant's CI is formulated into three different ways, which include: The Universal Law Formulation, The Humanity or End in Itself Formulation, and The Kingdom of Ends Formulation (Stanford) . The first to formulas combine to create the final formulation. Christianity closely relates to each formula, except for the final formulation. Christianity provides context where following the CI will not result in moral behavior. There are two factors missing from Kant's CI: faith and God's judgement.
The Universal Law of Formulation is described as " Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should be a universal law of nature" (Kantian Ethics). In simpler terms, act in a way which everyone would act in a similar situation. Let us compare maxims to commandments. Maxims are rules or principles in which you act, versus a commandment is a divine rule which you follow. The difference is minimum, but the context is similar. The first law corresponds to one of the greatest commandments in God's law. In Matthew 22:36-2240, Jesus tells us "Though shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" (King James). The alikeness between the two is the universal application in both. In all situations, even your own, you should act in accordance to the Universal Law of Formulation, which could be God's law. In Exodus 20 1:17 Moses receives God's 10 commandments or universal laws. Therefore, Kant explains why act...

... middle of paper ...

...ue morality. Resulting in God's will being separate from humanities' will.
Kant's Categorical Imperative is not enough to find universal laws of morality. The three formulations are a adequate start, but there are still factors missing. Christianity does not completely give all the answers to morality, but does give more satisfying answers. The world is constantly changing and very hard to predict, thus priori universal laws are extremely difficult to create. There are new dilemmas created each day, each needing someone or something to judge these new scenarios. We can try to comprehend issues of morality, but true morality can only be decided by a higher power. There are always going to be controversial issues. Sometimes these issues are split right down the middle in human judgment. When humans cannot decide, or the CIT test fails, God would know the true answer.

Show More
Related

  • Analysis of Immanuel Kant's Arguements in The Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals”

    553 Words  | 2 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • The Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals

    1055 Words  | 3 Pages

    Categorical imperatives are the basis of morality because they provoke pure reasons for every human beings actions. By the end of his work, one will understand Kant’s beliefs on morality, but to explain this, he goes into depth on the difference between hypothetical imperatives and Categorical Imperative, two different formulations of the Categorical Imperative, and a few examples. According to Kant, there are two types on imperatives, categorical imperatives and hypothetical imperatives. The Categorical Imperative is based on relation and not by means, which hypothetical imperatives are based on.

    Read More

  • Mill’s Objection to Kant’s Moral Theory

    1356 Words  | 3 Pages

    Kant argued that the Categorical Imperative (CI) was the test for morally permissible actions. The CI states: I must act in such a way that I can will that my maxim should become a universal law. Maxims which fail to pass the CI do so because they lead to a contradiction or impossibility. Kant believes this imperative stems from the rationality of the will itself, and thus it is necessary regardless of the particular ends of an individual; the CI is an innate constituent of being a rational individual. As a result, failure ...

    Read More

  • Analysis Of The Meditations By Rene Descartes

    1003 Words  | 3 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Immanuel Kant's Work On Grounding For The Metaphysics Of Morals?

    788 Words  | 2 Pages

    The first distinct articulation of the categorical imperative is the philosophy of morality.as Kant mentioned “Metaphysics of morals has to

    Read More

  • Morality Vs Immanuel Kant

    2119 Words  | 5 Pages

    The categorical imperative is an idea used to redefine ideas of morality (Kant 30). Morality is a priori; it is what we ought to do or ought not to do regarding an action (Hromas). "We know killing is wrong so we ought not to do it; we know this without experience" (Hromas). Morality is when everyone follows moral actions in agreement with the moral law and an action is not performed with a desire to feel a certain way (Kant’s Ethics). Immorality is when everyone follows the law except for one person (Hromas). Kant provides the example of a shopkeeper. The shopkeeper is to keep a fixed price for everyone so that the inexperienced shoppers do not get taken advantage of, such as a child (Kant 13). However, this action was done by the shopkeeper "for a self-interested purpose" (Kant 13). If the shop keeper did not keep a fixed price for everyone then word would spread about his not being fair to all customers and therefore no one will go into his store and he will go out of business. Another example is a street vendor in New York City. I am given a hotdog by a street vendor and am told it cost three dollars, but I only have one dollar and the vendor still sells me the hotdog for one dollar. A woman behind me asks for a hotdog and the vendor charges her three dollars. This vendor is not being fair to all of his customers because the woman and I both bought the same item but paid different amounts. I will come back to this street vendor but I am sure the woman will not. The vendor sold me the hotdog for one dollar because he wanted to receive some kind of payment for the food already in my hand and thus it was in his best interest to receive less

    Read More

  • Categorical Imperatives

    1664 Words  | 4 Pages

    For many years, the philosopher Immanuel Kant has argued for the existence of categorical imperatives. He defines categorical imperatives as rules that must be followed regardless of external circumstances, and that have content that is sufficient enough in and of itself to provide an agent with reason to act in a certain way. He is certain that moral rules fall under this label, and since his death, many of his followers have fought to support this claim.

    Read More

  • Aristotelian versus Kantian Ethics

    1474 Words  | 3 Pages

    Aristotle's and Kant's ideas of the means and ends of moral ethics are in sharp contrast. Both have strengths and weaknesses in their arguments, but Aristotle's is superior to Kant's because it is more realistic. I will first give the basis of both philosophies, Aristotle first, Kant second. Next, I will expand and question points of both philosophies, Aristotle's end, and Kant's means. Lastly, I will explain the reasoning behind why I favor Aristotle's ethics over Kant's. Both philosophies appeals to reason, but they come to different conclusions.

    Read More

  • Kantian vs. Virtue Ethics

    1325 Words  | 3 Pages

    Both Kantian and virtue ethicists have differing views about what it takes to be a good person. Kantian ethicists believe that being a good person is strictly a matter of them having a “good will.” On the other hand, virtue ethicists believe that being a good person is a matter of having a good character, or being naturally inclined to do the right thing. Both sides provide valid arguments as to what is the most important when it comes to determining what a person good. My purpose in writing this paper is to distinguish between Kantian ethics and virtue ethics, and to then, show which theory is most accurate.

    Read More

  • The Metaphysics of Morals by Immanuel Kant

    674 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Section One and Section Two of his work. Kant explores his position on his fundamental principle of morality, or his “categorical imperative”, or his idea that all actions are moral and “good” if they are performed as a duty. Such an idea is exemplified when he says, “I should never act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (Kant 14). The philosopher uses examples such as suicide and helping others in distress to apply his principal to possible real life situation. Kant is successful in regards to both issues. As a result, it means that categorical imperative can plausibly be understood as the fundamental principle of all morality. Kant’s reasoning for his categorical imperative is written in a way that makes the theory out to be very plausible.

    Read More

  • Three Formulations of the Categorical Imperative

    1530 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Utilitarianism And Kantian Ethics

    843 Words  | 2 Pages

    Imagine being faced with an important decision that affects a group of people. In order to make this decision you would have to decide which choice is wrong and which choice is right. There are two notable theories that believe a single moral principle provides the best way to achieve the best outcome to a moral judgement. These theories are utilitarianism and Kantian ethics.

    Read More

  • Kant's Categorical Imperative

    1532 Words  | 4 Pages

    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 Morality, the Universal Law formulation, Humanity or End in Itself formulation, and Kingdom of Ends formulation. In this essay, the viability 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

  • Ethics In Kantian Ethics

    848 Words  | 2 Pages

    People face ethical choices every day, and there are several different approaches towards reaching a decision. A professor is tasked with making a decision as to whether he should report a high-achieving student, Charlie, for plagiarizing an article. The professor must use reasoning and ethics. One of the most famous form of ethics is Kantian ethics, which is a form of deontology, or duty-based ethics. The professor can use Kantian ethics to make his decision, or he can take into account the context of the situation to further asses as I would do.

    Read More

  • The Universal Law Formula of the Categorical Imperative

    1053 Words  | 3 Pages

    The universal law formula of the categorical imperative ("the CI") is an unconditional moral law stating that one should “act only on that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” A maxim is the motivating principle or reason for one’s actions. A moral act is an act by which its maxim can become universal law that would apply to all rational creatures. As a universal law, all rational creatures must act according to this maxim. The CI requires one to imagine a world where the maxim one wishes to act by becomes a universal law, in which all people must act according to this maxim. If one wills this maxim to become universal law that all rational creatures must follow, but there is a contradiction in conception or will, than this maxim cannot become universal law, and thus, the act is not morally permissible. A contradiction in conception occurs when by willing one’s maxim to become universal law, one is imagining a logically impossible world, for there is a contradiction in the very idea of every rational creature acting on this maxim. In contrast, a contradiction in will does not yield a logically impossible world, but there is a contradiction in willing what it is one proposes to do and in wanting the maxim to become universal law.

    Read More

More about Kantian Ethics and Christian Ethics

Open Document