This paper discusses Immanuel Kant's famous argument that his Categorical Imperative is fundamentally different and superior to the greatly flawed Golden Rule.
# 25459 | 1,190 words | 4 sources | 2002 |
Published on Apr 29, 2003 in Philosophy (Metaphysics) , Religion and Theology (The Bible) , Philosophy (History - 18th Century)
$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
This paper agrees with Kant that the Categorical Imperative is very different from the Golden Rule. The author believes that the Categorical Imperative 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 Categorical Imperative.
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 fulfills 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."
Cite this Essay:
Categorical Imperative (2003, April 29) Retrieved February 07, 2023, from https://www.academon.com/essay/categorical-imperative-25459/
"Categorical Imperative" 29 April 2003. Web. 07 February. 2023. <https://www.academon.com/essay/categorical-imperative-25459/>