Kantian ethics: what makes an action good?
The most important thing for Kant is the motive not the results, unlike utilitarians.
We must act out of duty rather than accordance to duty.
Acting in accordance or out of duty - He uses the example of a shopkeeper who has he choice to
shortchange a child or give the child the correct amount of change. He decides to give the child the
correct amount of change because if he doesn’t it will ruin his business if his costumers were to find
out. Acting out of duty aligns with a good will. When you are acting out of duty, you’re acting because
it is what a good will would do, you’re doing a good act because it is good.
Good wills are good in themselves, they are not affected by our desires, and are universally good. An
action is not enough that it should conform to the moral law it must also be done for the sake of the
moral law. Why is it important for us to be rational beings? Kant argues that we need rationality in
order to work out how to do our duty, human beings have the ability to reason which is why we are
autonomous. (We are able to rise above our instincts and desires) This is what separates us from
other life forms. Goodness cannot arise from acting on impulse or natural inclination, even if it aligns
with duty.
Hypothetical and Categorical imperatives
An imperative is a command, a statement of what one ought to do. A hypothetical imperative is a
statement about what you ought to do assuming some desired or goal. It specifies a means to an end.
It is possible to opt of a hypothetical imperative. However, categorical imperatives are an absolute
moral rule that allows no exception. Our moral duties can be discovered from categorical imperatives,
these duties are absolute and therefore universal.
FIRST FORMULATION OF THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:
Act only on that maxim (principle) through which you can at the same time will that it should be a
universal law. Universal means making something work at all times and for everyone, If we all made
promises that we knew we would break then promises would loose meaning. Breaking promises is
something that cannot be universalised. If everyone lied about keeping their promises, there would
no longer be any promises to deceive someone about. This is known as a contradiction in conception
as it is logically impossible to be always lying as there would be no truth to lie about.
There are two ways in which we could fail in making our maxim universal:
1) Contradiction in conception – about logical impossibility
2) Contradiction in will – something a rational being cannot will. For example, not developing your
talents, one day you may need to have an intellectual conversation but your maxim to ‘not
develop my intellectual prospects in the interest of self-indulgence’ prevents you from engaging
in that intellectual conversation
It is not just immoral to disobey the Categorical imperative it is also irrational. Morality and rationality
are categorical.
SECOND FORMULATION OF THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:
“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 the end”
Essentially we should treat other rational beings as ends, not for self-interest or benefit but treating
other humans with respect and dignity. A correction of consequentialist systems. For example lying to
someone about something in order to avoid getting in trouble, in this instance you’re using that
person as a means to better your ends (avoid trouble) and therefore not respecting them as a rational
being.
The most important thing for Kant is the motive not the results, unlike utilitarians.
We must act out of duty rather than accordance to duty.
Acting in accordance or out of duty - He uses the example of a shopkeeper who has he choice to
shortchange a child or give the child the correct amount of change. He decides to give the child the
correct amount of change because if he doesn’t it will ruin his business if his costumers were to find
out. Acting out of duty aligns with a good will. When you are acting out of duty, you’re acting because
it is what a good will would do, you’re doing a good act because it is good.
Good wills are good in themselves, they are not affected by our desires, and are universally good. An
action is not enough that it should conform to the moral law it must also be done for the sake of the
moral law. Why is it important for us to be rational beings? Kant argues that we need rationality in
order to work out how to do our duty, human beings have the ability to reason which is why we are
autonomous. (We are able to rise above our instincts and desires) This is what separates us from
other life forms. Goodness cannot arise from acting on impulse or natural inclination, even if it aligns
with duty.
Hypothetical and Categorical imperatives
An imperative is a command, a statement of what one ought to do. A hypothetical imperative is a
statement about what you ought to do assuming some desired or goal. It specifies a means to an end.
It is possible to opt of a hypothetical imperative. However, categorical imperatives are an absolute
moral rule that allows no exception. Our moral duties can be discovered from categorical imperatives,
these duties are absolute and therefore universal.
FIRST FORMULATION OF THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:
Act only on that maxim (principle) through which you can at the same time will that it should be a
universal law. Universal means making something work at all times and for everyone, If we all made
promises that we knew we would break then promises would loose meaning. Breaking promises is
something that cannot be universalised. If everyone lied about keeping their promises, there would
no longer be any promises to deceive someone about. This is known as a contradiction in conception
as it is logically impossible to be always lying as there would be no truth to lie about.
There are two ways in which we could fail in making our maxim universal:
1) Contradiction in conception – about logical impossibility
2) Contradiction in will – something a rational being cannot will. For example, not developing your
talents, one day you may need to have an intellectual conversation but your maxim to ‘not
develop my intellectual prospects in the interest of self-indulgence’ prevents you from engaging
in that intellectual conversation
It is not just immoral to disobey the Categorical imperative it is also irrational. Morality and rationality
are categorical.
SECOND FORMULATION OF THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:
“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 the end”
Essentially we should treat other rational beings as ends, not for self-interest or benefit but treating
other humans with respect and dignity. A correction of consequentialist systems. For example lying to
someone about something in order to avoid getting in trouble, in this instance you’re using that
person as a means to better your ends (avoid trouble) and therefore not respecting them as a rational
being.
