| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "EVALUATION KANT MORAL PHILOSOPHY": |
|
|
Evaluation of Kant's Moral Philosophy, 2002.
An evaluation of "Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals - Deriving the Moral Law" by Immanuel Kant.
1,920 words (approx. 7.7 pages), 1 source, $ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A paper which explores philosopher Immanuel Kant's theory which is expressed in his book ?Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals - Deriving the Moral Law? where he guarantees a surefire formula we should apply for every decision we make. What is absolutely right and wrong (morals) by Kant?s definition are exclusively an idea from pure reason and not from anything we experience in the natural world. Therefore a pure, universal moral law is ?indispensably necessary? to allow for morality to live up to its name without any influence from our fallible empirical inclinations. His theory is examined by answering several questions pertaining to modern life.
From the Paper
"This supreme principle of morality is called the Categorical Imperative. Categorical means it is universal, and imperative means that it is absolute and must be done for its own sake. It is used by the will to determine the right action for every situation. The will is important, because the good will is the only thing without qualification that can be good. If it is the only true good thing, then it must be the basis for all good actions. Kant states that we have a duty to follow what we determine is right by reasoning. So the next piece of Kant?s philosophy is to explain how to go about this reasoning using the Categorical Imperative."
| |
|
Kant's Moral Philosophy, 2008.
This paper discusses Immanuel Kant's philosophy on ethical actions.
1,051 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper explains Immanuel's Kant's belief that moral actions are those actions that are carried out only with a sense of duty that is naturally imbued. The paper looks at Kant's categorical imperative that guides an individual to always think of how his or her actions would impact the world if he/her were held to a universal standard. Finally, the paper shows how, for all of its logical conclusions and simplistic rules, Kant's ethical system does not have a place in modern society.
From the Paper
"As a philosopher, Immanuel Kant argued that consequences of deeds were unrelated to any moral measurement of that deed. Instead, the motivation behind an action is the true measure of such action. This contrasts with the Utilitarian belief that any action that is carried out for the greatest good for the most number of people is moral. Kant would argue that moral actions are those actions that are carried out only with a sense of duty. Such an act conveys a sense of understanding that you perform an action solely because you know it is the right thing to do. Following a sense of duty is an action that only humans possess. As only humans have the capability to understand a sense of duty, we are compelled to act upon that duty (Rachels, 2007)."
| |
|
Moral Philosophy, 2004.
Compares and contrast the moral philosophies and theories of different philosophers.
863 words (approx. 3.5 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This research paper considers moral philosophy and moral theories from the standpoints of different philosophers. Most of them follow the principle of utilitarianism, believing in personal freedom, justice, and goodness to all. Those philosophers that divert from this idea, and yet stay in the fold of moral philosophy, are also considered.
From the Paper
"Alasdair MacIntyre and Virginia Held are two important figures in the fold of philosophy. Both are renowned because of their own special fields?MacIntyre for moral philosophy purely, and Virginia Held for partitioning it for feminist philosophy. MacIntyre?s views appear more global and humanitarian. One may say that Held?s goal is the same; she only looks at feminism as a necessary medium for the service of humanity."
| |
|
Moral Philosophy, 2004.
This paper offers a discussion of ethics and moral philosophy.
3,825 words (approx. 15.3 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 135.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer studies ethics and moral philosophy. The information in this study is based on the works and ideas of Plato, Aristotle, Kant and Mill. The writer focuses on Kant's ethical philosophy with particular regard to the categorical imperative. The writer also discusses the development of ethical discourse.
From the Paper
"The purpose of this research is to examine the validity and relevance of Kant's ethical philosophy, in particular the categorical imperative to modern experience. The plan of the research will be to set forth the historical and cultural context in which Kant's ethical philosophy was developed and then to discuss whether and to what extent a defense of the categorical imperative as a controlling ethical idea is possible in the modern world. The development of ethical discourse appears to be as old as the emergence of philosophy itself. "
| |
|
Hume, Moral Philosophy and Psychological Oppression, 2006.
An application of David Hume's moral philosophy to the concept of psychological oppression as described by Sandra Bartky.
1,477 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how oppression of all forms, whether based on race, sex, or another arbitrary characteristic, by the Humean conception is always morally wrong. It looks at how Hume identifies justice as an artificial virtue that has the sole purpose of restraining individuals' base impulses for the communal benefit. It also argues that discriminatory oppression is unjust because it does not have the import of natural morality, nor is it in the service of the communal interest.
From the Paper
"In the perpetration of psychological oppression, there exists a naturally vicious quality that Humaen principles identify as morally wrong. Psychological oppression, as conceptualized within a feminist framework by Sandra Bartky, is a cruel authority exerted by the force of one's own ideas. Bartky originated the concept to describe the process by which women internalize and perpetuate their subordinate status with a patriarchal society, though it is applicable to any arbitrarily subordinated population. Psychological oppression effectually facilitates the continued acquiescence to an unjust power that resided outside of the self, a power that is the original source and beneficiary of the self-oppressing ideas, such as stereotypes and essentialized inferiority. "
| |
|
Moral Philosophy in Moore and Gibbons' "Watchmen", 2005.
Examines the moral philosophies of the major characters in Alan Moore and David Gobbons' classic comic masterpiece "Watchmen."
1,250 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 8 sources, APA, $ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the moral/philosophical arguments represented by Rorschach, The Comedian, Dr. Manhattan and Ozymandias in Alan Moore and David Gibbons' "Watchmen." By citing specific examples from the text, this paper illuminates the intertextuality between "Watchmen's" major characters and the works of philosophers such as Sartre, Nietzsche and A.C. MacIntyre.
From the Paper
"Unlike the Comedian, Rorschach does find meaning through moral absolutism. Moral absolutism is a deontological moral philosophy that holds that moral rules are universal and absolute (McConnell, 1981, p. 287). Rorschach then proceeds to enforce these absolute moral rules in a way that is not necessarily consistent with "common morality.""
| |
|
Moral Philosophy and Capital Punishment, 2002.
Discusses the moral aspect of the death penalty from the perspectives of Kant and Mill.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 5 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay evaluates the death penalty from two perspectives: Kant's moral philosophy and Mill's views on utilitarianism. Other philosophers are discussed for the ways they interpret the moral philosophies of Kant and Mill. The essay concludes that Kant's basic principles regarding the value of human beings explicitly contradicts any rationale for the death penalty.
| |
|
Moral Philosophy and Family, 2005.
This paper defines and discusses the subject of family and family values.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 6 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This ethics essay uses moral philosophy to discuss the issue of family values. First, family and family values are defined and discussed, according to contemporary viewpoints and descriptions (the religious right, alternative marriages/parents, etc.). Then the issue is looked at with each of the following ethical/moral philosophies: ethical egoism, ethical relativism, and utilitarianism. Finally, the writer offers a personal point of view, based on one of the philosophies.
From the Paper
"This is such a loaded phrase when used today, with so many meanings and so few people agreeing on which meaning is correct, much less if it is properly implemented in society. First, the meaning of the term "family" is questioned. Does this mean a traditional nuclear family or does it mean any loving support system? Has the term changed or is it static, based on tradition? Secondly, what exact values, if any, should a family possess? Do these values change when the meaning of family changes? While these issues only further complicate the issue of family values, in our polarized, partisan world there seem to be two warring camps who define two main concepts of family and family values. This essay will look at how each of these factions stands on this issue. Then each stance will be weighed against three of the main moral philosophies."
| |
|
A New Moral Philosophy, 2006.
This paper examines the impact of various theories and philosophies in today's moral society.
3,040 words (approx. 12.2 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The writer of this essay examines the different philosophers in history including Aristotle, Descartes and Augustine and how their views and theories impact morality in society today. The paper also discusses society's dire need for a new morality that believes justice should be blind and lawyers not greedy, where glass ceilings disappear and affirmative action laws are no longer necessary.
From the Paper
"Perhaps, until Karl Marx, philosophers with ideas used God and religion to either provide doubts or explain rational phenomena of the Human mind- including being, doubt, wisdom, and the ability to adapt. Given this thesis, one can search for some sort of compatibility between Augustine and Descartes- both believing that God is the ultimate truth, and that the doubts that seem to occur in one's life-time are human traits. If Augustine searches for truth and finds it in the Judeo-Christian concept then Descartes searches for reality, which, he claims in his Meditation, can only be found if one refuses to doubt the existence of God."
| |
|
Socrates, Kant and Morality, 2008.
A comparative analysis of the views of Socrates and Kant on morality.
1,982 words (approx. 7.9 pages), 7 sources, APA, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines Socrates' and Kant's philosophies regarding morality and looks at how the fundamental difference in the definition between the two is that Kant's moral failure is an independent act to a moral right by virtue of the lack of impact of consequences while Socrates' main model of immorality is based on injustice resulting from the action. It discusses, therefore, how the dilemma of immorality in the former is an ethical one and immorality in the latter is presented as a social dilemma.
Outline:
Socrates
Socrates on Morality
Kant on Socrates
Socrates, Kant and Morality
From the Paper
"Kant's Moral philosophy is one of the main alternatives to utilitarianism which marginalizes moral humanistic virtues. Kant's view on morality is essentially deontological which implies a focus on the action to be done regardless of the consequences ("Kant: The Moral", 2001). This implies that if a person is doing something that is right, then even if the results of his actions create a negative outcome, then he still did the right thing. There is also a prescriptive quality to Kant's view: the assumption is that everyone should do what is right and that it should be universally right (Wood, 2004). Thus, for an action to be considered moral, it should be within the capacity of everyone and viewed as a correct action universally ("Kant's Moral Philosophy", 2007). Viewing Socrates' action through Kant's Moral Philosophy, there are arguments both to support the morality of Socrates actions."
| |
|
Moral Philosophy, 2006.
A review of a moral dilemma case involving an unfaithful wife.
1,228 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper takes a look at the philosophy of a moral dilemma. This paper discusses the sad scenario of the unfaithful wife known as "Jane" who finds herself faced with two equally unpleasant choices that are the consequences of her infidelity. The paper reviews and discusses these choices from different moral and philosophical perspectives.
From the Paper
"The advocate of social contract theory would stress that marriage is a social contract. When Jane violated this social contract, she did not merely personally cause her husband to feel bad. She also caused a rift in one of the institutions that uphold modern society. Even if no one is directly harmed by her actions, by devaluing the institution of marriage, either her own or the institution of the man whom she transgressed with, she is still doing harm to society. A social contract theorist would care little about Jane, her husband's, or the other man's feelings like a virtue ethicist. Rather the theorist would view Jane's decisions from a societal rubric, and point out that if every person felt free to be unfaithful, the moral fabric of society would completely disintegrate. "
| |
|
The Practical Contexts of Moral Philosophy, 2002.
Explores three theories of moral action within the profession of editor-in-chief of a publishing company.
1,650 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 4 sources, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this essay, I evaluate three theories of moral action in the contexts of a profession. The profession I have chosen is that of an Editor-in-Chief of a small publishing company. The three theories of morality I am considering are Aristotle's theory of Virtue, John Stuart Mill's utilitarianism, and Kant's theory of Duty, as it applies to Kant's categorical imperatives. As a person working with literature and art, the most useful moral theory comes from Aristotle's theory's of virtue, where character is the significant feature of morality, not pleasure or duty.
| |
|
Practical Ethics and Moral Philosophy, 2001.
This paper compares and contrasts the ideas put forth in the works of two modern philosophers, James Rachels and Anthony Weston, focusing specifically on their views of ethics and how it impacts on our lives.
2,097 words (approx. 8.4 pages), 0 sources, $ 65.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The following paper explores the question "What is the right way to behave" by looking at the many moral theories that try to conceive a universal set of rules to follow regardless of the circumstances. The writer examines how modern moral philosopher James Rachels addresses the problems with classic theories and tries to reconstruct Utilitarianism in order to address his values. This paper then compares Rachel's views to Anthony Weston's who abandons the need for moral theory and points out the value of reformulating the questions that moral theory is meant to address.
From the Paper
"Both James Rachels and Anthony Weston are philosophers interested in exploring the concept of Ethics and how it impacts our lives. We all are faced with decisions about how to act and there are numerous ways for us to come to a decision. Rachels approach is systematic in exploring various ways to decide what is right and wrong. All of these theories he puts forth are imperfect because they are effective only in select circumstances. Rachels believes that there are some universal truths that permeate Ethics; therefore, he favors theories that incorporate aspects of his ?Minimum Conception of Morality?. Weston on the other hand does not address universal truth. Instead he sees Ethics as a study in problem solving. In his examples of decision making, he steers away from rigid right and wrong answers to questions of morality. Instead he encourages the reader to be more creative in discovering other options than the ones we are first inclined to see. Both philosophers agree that Ethics requires us to think for ourselves and that there are real problems to be solved but how they go about solving them is very different."
| |
|
Kant and Morality, 2005.
This paper looks at Kant's beliefs on morality.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper, the writer examines Kant's beliefs on morality and the universal good of will. The writer compares Hume's ideas on morality with those of Kant. In this article, the writer's opinion on this matter is also expressed.
From the Paper
"Kant believed that will is the only thing inherently good without qualification and that we should behave according to the maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. By behaving this way a person is hoping that everyone else will behave this way in the future and so good will can be spread. Kant maintained that the expression of the moral law provides a concrete practical method for evaluating particular human actions of different types. For instance if ... "
| |
|
Kant's "Metaphysics of Morals", 2004.
An analysis of the significance of the "role of reason" in Kant's fundamental approach in his "Metaphysics of Morals".
6,408 words (approx. 25.6 pages), 31 sources, MLA, $ 148.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how, for the philosopher Kant, an understanding of knowledge is circumscribed by the limitations of sensory experience. It looks at how, in "The Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals", he delineates an understanding of the law and duty, which has its source a priori and is necessarily uncontaminated by empirical volition and data. It also discusses how his moral philosophy insists that knowledge that is contingent of context and conditions is not the highest knowledge and, in fact, dilutes pure understanding. It shows how Kant explores the ramifications of his view of moral understanding in a rigorous analysis of the action of a priori, synthetic reason and shows how reason acts ?in itself? to produce the groundwork for a metaphysics of morals.
Outline
Abstract
Contents
Introduction and Overview
Foreground: A general Overview of Some Essential Concepts
Reason
An Analysis of Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals
Bibliography
From the Paper
"In the third section of the Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals, Kant attempts to elucidate the difficulty of understanding freedom in a moral sense. His analysis differentiates the knowledge that can be obtained from the senses, through experience, from that which is valid through reason alone. This relates to the seminal element that runs like an intellectual current throughout his work, which is the distinction made between a contingent reality derived from sense experience and a reality or ?understanding? that comes from an a priori synthetic reasoning."
|
|
|
