Kantian ethics practice questions
1. Define deontological
What's right or wrong is determined by rules which should be followed in all circumstances. Kant
believes our intentions are what matter, not their consequences.
2. Define good will
For Kant, a good will represents the only ‘pure’ good in the world and it is the source of all moral
value. Good will is one that acts for the sake of duty and is good in itself.
3. Explain the distinction between acting in accordance with duty and acting out of duty
Kant’s normative ethical theory is focused on duty, and doing the morally right thing for the right
reason. Kant specifies that the good will is acting out of duty and that it is the only thing which is
good in itself. Therefore acting in accordance with duty is not as morally praiseworthy. You can do
the right thing but without the right motive the act has no moral worth. Kant’s shopkeeper example
illustrates this. If the shopkeeper gives the child the right change for a good reputation, then his
actions are not moral. He is acting in accordance with duty since he’s doing the right thing, but is
prioritising his reputation over the moral law. In contrast, a shopkeeper who gives the right change
because he recognises that being honest is the right thing to do has moral worth. This is because he
would be acting out of duty which Kant deems the right thing to do.
4. What is the categorical imperative?
Kant outlines imperatives as reasons that we should act in one way rather than another. He claims
the moral law should be universal and apply to everyone. They are unconditional and absolute, e.g.
you ought to keep your promises. It is independent of any goals or aims we may have.
5. What is a hypothetical imperative?
Kant outlines imperatives as reasons we should act in one way rather than another. Hypothetical
imperatives depend on having a certain goal, for example if you want to do well, you should study. It
is conditional based on whether you want to do well or not. If you don’t have this desire, then there
is no obligation to study.
6. Explain the relationship between imperatives and reason
Kant believed that we are rational beings, and as rational beings, we are rationally committed to
follow the imperative if we genuinely have the desire. For example, the hypothetical imperative: if
you want to do well, you should study. According to Kant, if you genuinely do want to succeed then
your reason commits you to studying.
7. Explain the distinction between hypothetical and categorical imperatives
Kant outlines imperatives as reasons that we should act in one way rather than another. He claims
the moral law should be universal and apply to everyone. They are unconditional and absolute, e.g.
you ought to keep your promises. It is independent of any goals or aims we may have. Hypothetical
imperatives, however, are conditional. They rely on you desiring the outcome. For example, the
hypothetical imperative: if you want to do well, you should study. According to Kant, if you genuinely
do want to succeed then your reason commits you to studying. If you don’t have this desire, then
there is no obligation to study.
, 8. Explain the first formulation of the categorical imperative
Moral imperatives are categorical ones. They are not based on ends, or desires, as they are not
universal. The categorical imperative can only be based on the idea of reason and rationality itself. It
is imperative that I only act on maxims which I can universalise and that other rational beings should
follow.
Act only according to that maxim which you can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law
9. Explain a contradiction in conception
For a law to be universal, it cannot be a contradiction in conception, this means to say it cannot be
contradictory. For example, we can question whether ‘you should lie’ is a universally applicable
maxim. If lying was universally acceptable, then the concept of lying would be impossible. The aim of
a lie is to be believed. However, if everybody expected to be lied to, then it wouldn’t work.
Therefore Kant would say the maxim ‘you should lie’ leads to a contradiction in conception. You
can't conceive of a world where everyone expects to be lied to, yet still tries to lie. Therefore lying is
not morally permissible. If a maxim leads to a contradiction in conception, you have a perfect duty
not to follow that maxim since it is always wrong.
10. Explain a contradiction in will
Assuming that a maxim doesn’t result in a contradiction in conception, we must ask whether it
results in a contradiction in will. This would mean that we couldn’t rationally will a maxim. For
example, can we rationally will to not help others in need. There is no contradiction in conception of
a world where nobody helps anyone else but we cannot rationally will it. Kant claims that sometimes
we have ends (goals) which cannot be achieved without help from others. To will the ends we must
also will the means. So we cannot rationally will goals without also willing the help of others, the
means. Kant recognises that not all goals require the help of others, so this results in an imperfect
duty. It is sometimes wrong to follow the maxim ‘not to help others in need.’
11. Explain Kant’s second categorical imperative
Kant gives another formulation of the categorical imperative which is the humanity formula. Kant
claims we should ‘act in such a way that you always treat humanity never simply as a means but
always as an end.’ It expresses the idea that it is always wrong to treat people as a means to your
own end, i.e. to use them. For example, tricking someone into marrying you. If you pretend to love
someone only to marry them and take their money, you treat them as a means to make money.
Kant’s issue with this is the deception. Deception undermines the rational agency of the other party
since you're withholding your true intentions, you stop the other party from rationally pursuing their
own ends e.g. finding a loving partner. However, if you were honest with the other party they would
be able to make an informed choice on whether this fits with their ends. If their goal was to marry
anyone, regardless of love, then you can both rationally use each other for benefit by acknowledging
each others ends.
12. Explain the issue of clashing/competing duties for Kant's ethical theory.
Kant’s deontological normative ethical theory is focused on duty, and doing the morally right thing
for the right reason. Kant specifies that the good will is acting out of duty and that it is the only thing
which is good in itself. The criticism of clashing duties can be illustrated by the murderer at the door
example. You friend is hiding in your home when a murderer comes to your door asking where they
1. Define deontological
What's right or wrong is determined by rules which should be followed in all circumstances. Kant
believes our intentions are what matter, not their consequences.
2. Define good will
For Kant, a good will represents the only ‘pure’ good in the world and it is the source of all moral
value. Good will is one that acts for the sake of duty and is good in itself.
3. Explain the distinction between acting in accordance with duty and acting out of duty
Kant’s normative ethical theory is focused on duty, and doing the morally right thing for the right
reason. Kant specifies that the good will is acting out of duty and that it is the only thing which is
good in itself. Therefore acting in accordance with duty is not as morally praiseworthy. You can do
the right thing but without the right motive the act has no moral worth. Kant’s shopkeeper example
illustrates this. If the shopkeeper gives the child the right change for a good reputation, then his
actions are not moral. He is acting in accordance with duty since he’s doing the right thing, but is
prioritising his reputation over the moral law. In contrast, a shopkeeper who gives the right change
because he recognises that being honest is the right thing to do has moral worth. This is because he
would be acting out of duty which Kant deems the right thing to do.
4. What is the categorical imperative?
Kant outlines imperatives as reasons that we should act in one way rather than another. He claims
the moral law should be universal and apply to everyone. They are unconditional and absolute, e.g.
you ought to keep your promises. It is independent of any goals or aims we may have.
5. What is a hypothetical imperative?
Kant outlines imperatives as reasons we should act in one way rather than another. Hypothetical
imperatives depend on having a certain goal, for example if you want to do well, you should study. It
is conditional based on whether you want to do well or not. If you don’t have this desire, then there
is no obligation to study.
6. Explain the relationship between imperatives and reason
Kant believed that we are rational beings, and as rational beings, we are rationally committed to
follow the imperative if we genuinely have the desire. For example, the hypothetical imperative: if
you want to do well, you should study. According to Kant, if you genuinely do want to succeed then
your reason commits you to studying.
7. Explain the distinction between hypothetical and categorical imperatives
Kant outlines imperatives as reasons that we should act in one way rather than another. He claims
the moral law should be universal and apply to everyone. They are unconditional and absolute, e.g.
you ought to keep your promises. It is independent of any goals or aims we may have. Hypothetical
imperatives, however, are conditional. They rely on you desiring the outcome. For example, the
hypothetical imperative: if you want to do well, you should study. According to Kant, if you genuinely
do want to succeed then your reason commits you to studying. If you don’t have this desire, then
there is no obligation to study.
, 8. Explain the first formulation of the categorical imperative
Moral imperatives are categorical ones. They are not based on ends, or desires, as they are not
universal. The categorical imperative can only be based on the idea of reason and rationality itself. It
is imperative that I only act on maxims which I can universalise and that other rational beings should
follow.
Act only according to that maxim which you can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law
9. Explain a contradiction in conception
For a law to be universal, it cannot be a contradiction in conception, this means to say it cannot be
contradictory. For example, we can question whether ‘you should lie’ is a universally applicable
maxim. If lying was universally acceptable, then the concept of lying would be impossible. The aim of
a lie is to be believed. However, if everybody expected to be lied to, then it wouldn’t work.
Therefore Kant would say the maxim ‘you should lie’ leads to a contradiction in conception. You
can't conceive of a world where everyone expects to be lied to, yet still tries to lie. Therefore lying is
not morally permissible. If a maxim leads to a contradiction in conception, you have a perfect duty
not to follow that maxim since it is always wrong.
10. Explain a contradiction in will
Assuming that a maxim doesn’t result in a contradiction in conception, we must ask whether it
results in a contradiction in will. This would mean that we couldn’t rationally will a maxim. For
example, can we rationally will to not help others in need. There is no contradiction in conception of
a world where nobody helps anyone else but we cannot rationally will it. Kant claims that sometimes
we have ends (goals) which cannot be achieved without help from others. To will the ends we must
also will the means. So we cannot rationally will goals without also willing the help of others, the
means. Kant recognises that not all goals require the help of others, so this results in an imperfect
duty. It is sometimes wrong to follow the maxim ‘not to help others in need.’
11. Explain Kant’s second categorical imperative
Kant gives another formulation of the categorical imperative which is the humanity formula. Kant
claims we should ‘act in such a way that you always treat humanity never simply as a means but
always as an end.’ It expresses the idea that it is always wrong to treat people as a means to your
own end, i.e. to use them. For example, tricking someone into marrying you. If you pretend to love
someone only to marry them and take their money, you treat them as a means to make money.
Kant’s issue with this is the deception. Deception undermines the rational agency of the other party
since you're withholding your true intentions, you stop the other party from rationally pursuing their
own ends e.g. finding a loving partner. However, if you were honest with the other party they would
be able to make an informed choice on whether this fits with their ends. If their goal was to marry
anyone, regardless of love, then you can both rationally use each other for benefit by acknowledging
each others ends.
12. Explain the issue of clashing/competing duties for Kant's ethical theory.
Kant’s deontological normative ethical theory is focused on duty, and doing the morally right thing
for the right reason. Kant specifies that the good will is acting out of duty and that it is the only thing
which is good in itself. The criticism of clashing duties can be illustrated by the murderer at the door
example. You friend is hiding in your home when a murderer comes to your door asking where they
