“Kantian Ethics is too abstract to be useful”
The strongest line of argument is that Kantian Ethics is good in theory but not in practice
because…
Abstract: Good in theory, not applicable to the real world
Paragraph 1:
Theme: Duty and Good Will
Strength: Duty is unbiased, it is universally applicable and available to all.
Weakness: Conflicts of Duty (Satre) A successful challenge of Kant comes from Satre and
concerns how helpful Kants categorical Imperative actually is when there are conflicts of
duty. In Satres’ example, the conflict for Satre’s students is between the principles of ‘caring
for your mother’ and ‘fighting for justice’. Both principles are worthy and both are
universalisable , but the students cannot enact both at the same time. These conflicts of
duty raise a significant problem in Kants theory. The fact that Kant himself wouldn’t address
this issue shows that he wouldn’t know the answer.
Paragraph 2:
Theme : First Formulation of the Catergorical Imperative: Univeralisability
Strength: Universally applicablevfy
Weakness : Universalisability, you can universalise any Maxim you want to suit you.
MacIntyre has noted that is is possible to use Kants idea of univeralisability to justify
anything. The example MacIntyre gives is consider the Maxim “ All people called Mark living
in Manchester and have a cat named Troy, shoSXZD~uld be given free access to concerts at
the bridgewater Hall’. This Maxim could be universalised- it would not be self-contradictory-
but it is clearly so specific as to apply to only one person. This is not what Kant had in mind
with the principle if universalizability and therefore a problem for his ethical system.
Paragraph 3:
Theme : Second formulation of the categorical imperative Treat people as an ends not a
means
Strength: Eliminates prejudice
Weakness :Sexual and Business Ethics. It is essentially impossible to not use people.
by rejecting the hypothetical imperative as the imperative of morality, Kantian ethics rejects an
approach which is based on easily recognised and easily acted upon factors such as sympathy,
empathy and love - all of which are applicable to practical moral decision-making
Kant did not provide sufficient exemplification of how moral decisions might be made using the
categorical imperative and this gives a lack of clarity to his ethical approach
In conclusion in practical moral decision-making, the combination of concepts involved in
Kantian ethics such as duty, maxims, the hypothetical and categorical imperatives and the
postulates is too theoretical Kantian ethics is overly complex since it rests on a priori
concepts rather than on less abstract and more easily understood empirical data such as the
principle of utility in utilitarianism
The strongest line of argument is that Kantian Ethics is good in theory but not in practice
because…
Abstract: Good in theory, not applicable to the real world
Paragraph 1:
Theme: Duty and Good Will
Strength: Duty is unbiased, it is universally applicable and available to all.
Weakness: Conflicts of Duty (Satre) A successful challenge of Kant comes from Satre and
concerns how helpful Kants categorical Imperative actually is when there are conflicts of
duty. In Satres’ example, the conflict for Satre’s students is between the principles of ‘caring
for your mother’ and ‘fighting for justice’. Both principles are worthy and both are
universalisable , but the students cannot enact both at the same time. These conflicts of
duty raise a significant problem in Kants theory. The fact that Kant himself wouldn’t address
this issue shows that he wouldn’t know the answer.
Paragraph 2:
Theme : First Formulation of the Catergorical Imperative: Univeralisability
Strength: Universally applicablevfy
Weakness : Universalisability, you can universalise any Maxim you want to suit you.
MacIntyre has noted that is is possible to use Kants idea of univeralisability to justify
anything. The example MacIntyre gives is consider the Maxim “ All people called Mark living
in Manchester and have a cat named Troy, shoSXZD~uld be given free access to concerts at
the bridgewater Hall’. This Maxim could be universalised- it would not be self-contradictory-
but it is clearly so specific as to apply to only one person. This is not what Kant had in mind
with the principle if universalizability and therefore a problem for his ethical system.
Paragraph 3:
Theme : Second formulation of the categorical imperative Treat people as an ends not a
means
Strength: Eliminates prejudice
Weakness :Sexual and Business Ethics. It is essentially impossible to not use people.
by rejecting the hypothetical imperative as the imperative of morality, Kantian ethics rejects an
approach which is based on easily recognised and easily acted upon factors such as sympathy,
empathy and love - all of which are applicable to practical moral decision-making
Kant did not provide sufficient exemplification of how moral decisions might be made using the
categorical imperative and this gives a lack of clarity to his ethical approach
In conclusion in practical moral decision-making, the combination of concepts involved in
Kantian ethics such as duty, maxims, the hypothetical and categorical imperatives and the
postulates is too theoretical Kantian ethics is overly complex since it rests on a priori
concepts rather than on less abstract and more easily understood empirical data such as the
principle of utility in utilitarianism
