Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Kantian ethics vs
Limitation or challenges of deontology
Limitation or challenges of deontology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Kantian ethics vs
Deontology is the ethics that focuses on the intention of an action regardless of anything other than that like its consequences, actor’s feelings or motives. And it was led by Kant. Kant said that god cannot be proved by the existence of morality, which means that god cannot be proved by reason. But he did not say that god does not exist. Rather, he argued that one could assume god’s existence because of morality. This is could be explained by his explanation of deontology.
In deontology, good will and reason are important. Good will is the only thing that is unconditionally good, which can be pursued by using free will. And free will is the decision by one’s reason. Therefore, one act can only be assessed as good when one’s act of own will goes after good will.
Kant states that morality is to observe
…show more content…
Due to this fact, Kant states that god is important hypothesis, which means that god’s existence is not fact but rather assumption because of the definition of fact. Fact can stand when it can be perceived and understood. However, a metaphysical being cannot. Therefore god’s existence is just merely an assumption. This bears the major difference from Craig’s first premise: If god does not exist, then objective moral values do not exist.
According to Kant, happiness is a result that comes out as a result or a reward from perfect pursuit of good will. Happiness needs the harmony between the goal, good will, and the determining principle of his will in physical nature. As reason logically demands that the highest good should be achieved, a cause of the harmony of morality and happiness should exist for the highest good.
This cause cannot be in the physical nature where human lives in because it precedes the nature as its cause. Therefore the cause must be metaphysical. Kant suggests that this metaphysical cause is god. Humans cannot be the cause as they are part of the physical
This “good will” is the basis of for a deontological argument. Courage, perseverance and patience are all qualities of character, while qualities of mind may include intelligence and judgement. All are desirable and good; however these qualities can become bad and harmful, if there is no good will.
Before we look into specifics, we’ll examine the history and development of “happiness” as a philosophy. Of course, the emotion of happiness has always existed, but it began to be seriously contemplated around 2,500 years ago by philosophers like Confucius, Buddha, Socrates and Aristotle. Shortly after Buddha taught his followers his Noble Eight Fold Path (which we will talk about later), Aristotle was teaching that happiness is “dependent on the individual” (Aristotle).
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.
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
Kant’s reasoning…. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. All human beings desire and seek happiness ---------------------------------------------
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.
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...
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).
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.
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.
...nd this is the result of the unity of synthesis of imagination and apperception. The unity of apperception which is found in all the knowledge is defined by Kant as affinity because it is the objective ground of knowledge. Furthermore, all things with affinity are associable and they would not be if it was not for imagination because imagination makes synthesis possible. It is only when I assign all perceptions to my apperception that I can be conscious of the knowledge of those perceptions. This understanding of the objects, also known as Faculty of Rules, relies on the sense of self and is thus, the source of the laws of nature.
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.
According to Immanuel Kant’s Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, the only thing that is good in itself is the good will. Our intentions to perform certain behaviours or engage in courses of action are guided by the good will, which itself, under the Kantian view, must adhere to a set of laws. Such laws would involve moral principles or maxims that apply to all rational beings, based on reason rather than circumstance, and Kant arrives at the Categorical Imperative as this universal law. This idea has a variety of formulations, the first and foremost being: “act only in such a way that you would want the maxim or motivating principle of your action to become a universal law”. Kant’s conclusion has had profound impacts on the study of morality,
This essay will explain the validity of Kant’s argument by first explaining Kant ’s view on duty, then analyse his view of
Second, possessing and maintaining one's moral goodness is the very condition under which anything else is worth having or pursuing. Intelligence and even pleasure are worth having only on the condition that they do not require giving up one's fundamental moral convictions. The value of a good will thus cannot be that it secures certain valuable ends, whether of our own or of others, since their value is entirely conditional on our possessing and maintaining a good will. Indeed, since it is good under any condition, its goodness must not depend on any particular conditions obtaining. Thus, Kant points out