To what extent is Kantian Ethics too abstract to apply to practical moral decision-making?
Introduction
Define: Moral decision-making- Making a decision on your actions based on an ethical theory e.g.
Kantian Ethics that focuses on the deontological aspect of your actions.
Importance: The practicality of a moral ethical theory is important because it is intended to be
applied to real life.
Scholars: Williams, Ross, Kant, Sartre, Mill
Conclusion: Kantian Ethics is too abstract to apply to practical moral decision-making.
Paragraph 1
Point: Kantian ethics is too abstract to practical moral decision-making because of the idea of
conflicting duties.
Argument: The categorical imperative goes some way in helping us make moral decisions we’re
faced with but if we encounter conflicts between different duties, it appears there is no way for us to
choose. For example, how can you decide whether you should look after your sick mother or revise
for an exam? Sartre described a pupil torn between looking after his mother in France or going to
England to fight with the Free French Forces. “I find myself drawn into a vicious circle.”
Counterargument: W.D. Ross tried to resolve this problem by claiming that duties were prima facie
and it is left to us to decide in a particular situation which duty is our actual duty. Ross’ prima facie
duties (fidelity (keeping promises), reparation (making up for any wrong actions), gratitude, justice,
beneficence (helping others), non-maleficence (avoid harming others), self-improvement might be a
better approach as the right duty can be focused on according to the situation at the time.
Paragraph 2
Point: Kantian Ethics is not too abstract to apply to moral decision-making.
Argument: They offer flexibility in that rules can be developed from them. Perhaps Kant is offering
the system for creating rules that, once disseminated, will guide people. Moral theories that are not
interested in the development of the moral person may be less effective a creating a better society.
Kant sees ethics as the development of a better world, not just better individual decisions, and that
means better people.
John Stuart Mill argued that Kantian ethics becomes consequential when you go through the process
of universalising a maxim. He asserts that by asking about the logical coherence of a maxim such as ‘I
ought to steal’ it is just a way of determining whether the outcome will be good or bad for society.
Counterargument: Kant provides a powerful idealised concept of morality, with attention to the
worth of the human person, held high above all other things and with a strong sense of universal
rules untainted by human emotion. However, these features of his theory do present some practical
challenges. Example- Hospitals have to decide how to use limited resources for the greatest benefit
and this can mean deciding to ration treatment or indeed not provide certain kinds of expensive
Introduction
Define: Moral decision-making- Making a decision on your actions based on an ethical theory e.g.
Kantian Ethics that focuses on the deontological aspect of your actions.
Importance: The practicality of a moral ethical theory is important because it is intended to be
applied to real life.
Scholars: Williams, Ross, Kant, Sartre, Mill
Conclusion: Kantian Ethics is too abstract to apply to practical moral decision-making.
Paragraph 1
Point: Kantian ethics is too abstract to practical moral decision-making because of the idea of
conflicting duties.
Argument: The categorical imperative goes some way in helping us make moral decisions we’re
faced with but if we encounter conflicts between different duties, it appears there is no way for us to
choose. For example, how can you decide whether you should look after your sick mother or revise
for an exam? Sartre described a pupil torn between looking after his mother in France or going to
England to fight with the Free French Forces. “I find myself drawn into a vicious circle.”
Counterargument: W.D. Ross tried to resolve this problem by claiming that duties were prima facie
and it is left to us to decide in a particular situation which duty is our actual duty. Ross’ prima facie
duties (fidelity (keeping promises), reparation (making up for any wrong actions), gratitude, justice,
beneficence (helping others), non-maleficence (avoid harming others), self-improvement might be a
better approach as the right duty can be focused on according to the situation at the time.
Paragraph 2
Point: Kantian Ethics is not too abstract to apply to moral decision-making.
Argument: They offer flexibility in that rules can be developed from them. Perhaps Kant is offering
the system for creating rules that, once disseminated, will guide people. Moral theories that are not
interested in the development of the moral person may be less effective a creating a better society.
Kant sees ethics as the development of a better world, not just better individual decisions, and that
means better people.
John Stuart Mill argued that Kantian ethics becomes consequential when you go through the process
of universalising a maxim. He asserts that by asking about the logical coherence of a maxim such as ‘I
ought to steal’ it is just a way of determining whether the outcome will be good or bad for society.
Counterargument: Kant provides a powerful idealised concept of morality, with attention to the
worth of the human person, held high above all other things and with a strong sense of universal
rules untainted by human emotion. However, these features of his theory do present some practical
challenges. Example- Hospitals have to decide how to use limited resources for the greatest benefit
and this can mean deciding to ration treatment or indeed not provide certain kinds of expensive
