Abstract This work deals with Kant's understanding of the basis for moral actions taken from his work entitled "The Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals". He believes that there is one criterion for moral obligation which he refers to as the "categoricalimperative". A large part of this essay discusses the four ways in which this "categoricalimperative" can be formulated.
From the Paper "In presenting the one criterion for moral obligation, Immanuel Kant first rejects other moral traditions before his time: among them, the virtue theory, which bases morality on good character traits; and the consequential theory, which bases it on the consequences of actions. In response, he argues that moral actions are based only on a "supreme principle of morality" ? one that is objective, rational and freely chosen -- which he called the categorical imperative."
Tags: Kant, Categorical, Imperative, morality, obligation, objective, formula
This paper discusses Immanuel Kant's famous argument that his CategoricalImperative is fundamentally different and superior to the greatly flawed Golden Rule.
1,190 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 4 sources, 2002, $ 40.95
Abstract This paper agrees with Kant that the CategoricalImperative is very different from the Golden Rule. The author believes that the CategoricalImperative is clearly independent of the sentiment regarding the self; whereas, the Golden Role's moral strength comes directly from, and is dependent on, a sentiment regarding the self. The author concludes that the Golden Rule seems much more consistent with the irrational mess that is human morality and behavior and is an invaluable and simple tool for guiding moral decisions than is the CategoricalImperative.
From the Paper "Kant himself more succinctly states his Categorical Imperative as "Act only on that maxim whereby thou canst at the same time will that it should become a universal law." Under Kant's Categorical Imperative, an action can only be considered moral if it fulfils three important criteria. First, the action must be judged to be universally acceptable. Second, the action must be judged to respect the dignity of persons. Finally, the judged action must be acceptable to rational people. Further, the Categorical Imperative must always be followed regardless of individual self-interest."
This paper explores the first and second formulations of Emmanuel Kant's "CategoricalImperative" and cites evidence that the two can indeed work together, contrary to prominent interpretation.
1,900 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 0 sources, 2001, $ 60.95
Abstract This paper is centrally interested in the definition of "objectivity" in the work of E. Kant, particularly in relation to his first first and second formulations of the categoricalimperative. This paper explores the conventional interpretation of the notion of objectivity, and then offers a modernized understanding of the term.
From the Paper "This essay holds that the application of the first and second formulations of Kant's moral doctrine the categorical imperative"the purpose of which is to determine the morality of human action"can and must be applied in conjunction. When applied in conjunction, it is shown that the two formulations prohibit and enjoin the same actions for the same reason. First, this essay explores the conventional interpretation of the first and second formulations of the categorical imperative. After mentioning the primary fault of this interpretation?namely, the confusion surrounding the interpretation of the terms "objective" or "objectivity"? a new interpretation is suggested."
Abstract This paper examines how Nietzsche ultimately argues that Kantian reason in justifying the categoricalimperative is enslaving. It explains that not only is the logic of the categoricalimperative enslaving, but also it is ultimately cruel because it restricts the freedom of individuals and holds back the good from prospering. The categoricalimperative argues that there is an inherent value to morality and that doing one's moral duty is an imperative.
From the Paper "Kant further argues that actions can only be called moral if they are undertaken only for their own sake without regard to their ends and without regard to the specific of the situation. One must be willing to will his actions as a universal law in order for them to be considered moral. Nietzsche soundly denies this concept, arguing that morals don?t have intrinsic value but derive their meaning from a historical event. Morals are contextual, and, even worse, a degradation and perversion of the natural order. Nietzsche discusses the manner in which morality developed to enslave the stronger among humanity, and how this historical "slave revolt in morality" has served to cruelly enslave man. Nietzsche believes that "bad conscience" has served to enslave humanity and pervades all of culture, rendering it cruel, harmful, and unnatural. In science, Nietzsche momentarily locates the possibility of an antidote to the morality of ?good and evil,? but due to the significance it places on truth, Nietzsche ultimately dismisses it, too. Only by transcending conventional Judeo-Christian morality can the cruelty of the culture of the categorical imperative ultimately be overcome."
Abstract This philosophical study analyzes two of Kant's categoricalimperatives, which define why they cannot justify the War in Iraq. The writer maintains that in Kant's third imperative or "action" on moral duty, the primary function of long-term warfare for the safety of American citizens cannot justify why America led a preemptive war against a sovereign nation. Also, the writer notes that the 'selfless' nature of Kant's fourth imperative defines a higher loyalty above materialism and personal gain, which was falsely engineered for the invasion through the guise of supporting global democracy and national security in the aftermath of the invasion. The writer concludes that, in essence, Kant's third and fourth moral imperatives define the action and sense of duty that simply cannot justify the War in Iraq and its highly immoral implications for American foreign policy.
From the Paper "This aspect of the boundaries of duty and inclination are much more difficult to discern, as they are separate but not without the greater appearance of duty making the merchant look far more honest on the exterior. Kant was aware of these types of motivations of a person in relation to using reason to discern personal desire, which would eventually result in the merchant making a great deal of personal wealth out of a behavior that appeared socially honest and moral. The crucial blend of a selfish personal interest and the veneer of national security helped to promote a war that was false and immoral along Kant's own categorization of duty. Kant would ultimately agree with this principle, due to the exterior factors that made it appear as if Hussein was developing these weapons. In this manner, Kant would find this 'action' immoral due to the more selfish reasons for invading a sovereign country unilaterally under the pretense of national security."
Abstract This paper explains that often writers of resumes exaggerate and even lie about their accomplishments, skills and education to put the candidate in the most favorable light: Is this immoral, vicious or unjust to stretch the truth? The author points out that, when Kant considers the morality of lying, he applies the categoricalimperative; lying is wrong because it adversely affects mankind universally and man individually. The paper relates that Mill argues that the wide-ranging social harm that lying causes far outweighs the good experienced by its beneficiaries and that, although at times lies may be useful, lying takes away the trustworthiness of the individual.
From the Paper "Kant's moral system is based on rationality. It attempts to show how any rational being would agree to universal moral laws. For Kant, human beings as moral agents are rational and autonomous (free to make choices). He thinks that as rational beings we are able to judge whether any action is moral by asking if the action is consistent with the categorical imperative. According to Kant, moral imperatives exist which are inherent in human nature. The existence of these imperatives provides evidence that the goodness of an act is not related to its outcome."
Abstract This paper creates a wartime ethical dilemma of a lieutenant who is asked to be a decoy by his commanding officer but refuses. His commanding officer threatens to shoot him. The lieutenant continues to object and gets shot. The author argues the question by using Mill's utilitarian theory, Kant's categoricalimperative theory and Royce's loyalty theory.
From the Paper "There are two fundamental issues in this situation that challenge Mill, Kant and Royce: First, whether sacrificing Lt. Downs as a decoy is justifiable, and second, whether shooting him in the face of his non-compliance was justifiable, or even humane."
From the Paper "This paper will examine the third formula of Kant's categorical imperative by scrutinizing the four illustrations he uses to prove his point. The categorical imperative is an attempt at a formal law which, if followed, will dictate and result in moral action. In the third formula of the categorical imperative Kant states that one must: "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." According to Kant this rule should fit any moral situation and any situation which does not fit this formula cannot be moral. It is this contention - that he has found a set of absolute guidelines - which will be questioned.
As a means, for it will be shown here that they are not ends in themselves, of supporting his third formula Kant employs four ... "
Abstract This paper examines "Chinatown", a film that combines elements of environmentalism into the story that it tells. It looks at how the films beginning may be classified as a classic film noir, but as the film progresses the film speaks to humanity's responsibility to the environment, as well as different moral and ethical philosophies and how they relate to the environmental movement. It discusses such themes as personal ethics and environmental justice as well as the two moral theories at play in the story, that of Mill's and Bentham's Utilitarianism and that of Immanuel Kant's CategoricalImperative.
From the Paper "There are several features about Utilitarianism that are important, for the sake of the movie, and otherwise. One of these is that actions, in and of themselves, have no moral value. The problem is then, that the actions of Noah Cross and his cohort are not in and of themselves moral or immoral. At the same time, the actions of Gittes are, in and of themselves, neither immoral or moral either. In each case, what is important is the end-result. According to Utilitarian principles, the only aspect of the state of the world that has any moral significance is the happiness or misery of people. All people are, ethically speaking, always equal, in other words, one person's happiness is worth as much an y one else's happiness."
This paper addresses differences between two versions of the famous categoricalimperative in Kant's Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals. These formulations deal with the universal/objective and individual/subjective views of moral and ethical action
1,650 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 1 source, 2002, $ 62.95
Abstract This paper addresses differences between two versions of the famous categoricalimperative in Kant's Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals. These formulations deal with the universal/objective and individual/subjective views of moral and ethical actions. There is some discrepancy between what ethical 'results' each formulation delivers, which is discussed in the paper.
Abstract This paper discusses how Immanuel Kant is a very controversial philosopher and how he argues from a Deontological standpoint that actions are determined as good in themselves, not by their consequences. It describes Kant's moral law and his CategoricalImperative and then offers a critique of Kant, based on the fact that he contradicts himself, he does not allow for satisfaction from good will, and his moral theory is fundamentally flawed.
From the Paper "Kant then gives us the first formulation of the categorical imperative. "Act only on that maxim whereby thou canst at the same time will that it should become a universal law" (P. 312). In other words, before you act, you should consider upon what principle you are acting. Then be sure that it is reasonable to will that that particular principle be a universal law applicable to everyone at every time. Kant gives four examples to illustrate this point (I will discuss two of them). One of the examples is of a man who has been going through a series of misfortunes and is considering suicide. His maxim is that due to self-love, it is acceptable to take your own life to prevent the evil that its longer duration would bring. But this cannot be adopted as a universal law of nature."
Abstract This paper discusses how the treatment of Job in the "Book of Job" violates every principle of fairness and justice. It examines how, over time, we have come to accept a universal definition, or concept of fairness, which has evolved from many different religions into what we now call the Golden Rule. It also looks at Immanuel Kant's CategoricalImperative as a post- Machiavellian idea and its relevance to the Book of Job and attempts to answer the question of why God allows Job to be punished, even though Job represents the most honorable and loyal man.
From the Paper "In the Book of Job, God, however, uses Job solely as a means. Not only has Job never failed in his obedience to God, but also he has never failed to live by the Golden Rule. Moreover, Job insures that his children are equally obedient and rule abiding: "Job sent for his children and sanctified them, rising early in the morning and sacrificing a whole-offering for each of them; for he thought that they might somehow have sinned against God and committed blasphemy in their hearts. This he always did" (BOJ 670). God agrees, "Job was the greatest man in all the East" (670). God says to Satan, "You will find no one like him on earth, a man of blameless and upright life" (670). It is because of Job's greatness than God chooses Job to be the victim of Satan's torturous "experiment" to prove Job's selfish intents for serving God."
Abstract This paper provides a review of the Kant's work, "Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals", in order to identify the most important argumentative steps in arriving at the categoricalimperative. It looks at how Kant provides a convoluted but exhaustive analysis of what parts reason and duty play in developing moral concepts in mankind. Kant maintains that actions are moral if and only if they are undertaken for the sake of morality alone, how the moral quality of an action must be judged not according to the action's consequences but according to the motive that produced it, and finally, how actions are only moral if they are undertaken out of respect for the moral law.
From the Paper "Kant believed that actions of any sort must be undertaken from a sense of duty dictated by reason, and no action performed for expediency or solely in obedience to law or custom can be regarded as being ?moral. Kant says his third proposition is a consequence of the first two. ?I would express thus Duty is the necessity of acting from respect for the law. I may have inclination for an object as the effect of my proposed action, but I cannot have respect for it, just for this reason, that it is an effect and not an energy of will. Similarly I cannot have respect for inclination, whether my own or another's; I can at most, if my own, approve it; if another's, sometimes even love it; i.e., look on it as favourable to my own interest.?"
Abstract This paper looks at some key concepts introduced by Kant in his "Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals", among these, Kant's notion of "principle", "duty" and "reason". A critique of Kant is offered and his categoricalimperative and the universalist position it engenders is rejected.
From the Paper "The moral philosophy of Immanuel Kant is based upon notions of principle duty and reason in his Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals, he presents these ideas seeking to devise a framework upon which all moral obligations may be grounded. "
Abstract This article presents an argument against abortion that uses the categoricalimperative and utilitarianism to argue abortion is morally and ethically wrong. The writer contends that abortion is morally wrong because it gives an individual the right to use another individual for her own purposes. Further the writer argues against abortion for ethical reasons, because it inflicts pain upon another.
From the Paper "The second a sperm and egg are united a new life is founded. From that point on any attempt to abort this life form is tantamount to murder. Because it equates to the taking of a human life from both a moral and an ethical perspective, abortion is wrong. Morally, abortion is wrong because it provides an individual with the right to use another individual as an instrument for their own purposes. Ethically, abortion is wrong because it inflicts pain upon another human being. No ..."
