Lesson 3 "Immanuel Kant and Deontology"

 Immanuel Kant was the fourth of nine children born to pious parents in Königsberg, Germany, on
April 22, 1724.

 Kant's life was dull. He never traveled more than 30 miles from his hometown, unlike his
predecessors.

 According to Kant's categorical imperative ethical theory, an act's rightness or wrongness is not
determined by its outcomes.

 He believed that moral philosophy's goal is to understand how we might arrive at universally
binding norms of action. He was seeking a general moral principle. The human being is subject to
his good will, not to the surrounding world.

Kantian Ethics – Goodwill

The only thing that is excellent is a good will. Kant defines “will” as intention or motive. Kant
believed that morality is purely a matter of intention, purpose, and will. Man's will is good, according to
Kant, when it acts in accordance with obligation. In other words, obedience to one's responsibility is
due to one's own internal decision, not to an external demand.

Duty is the only valid moral motive in Kant's view. Doing the correct deed for the wrong reasons
like pleasure, prestige, or avoiding guilt is wrong. Good will isn't a means to an end. It is intrinsically
valuable.

Kantian Ethics – Imperative Categorical

All tasks or obligations can be converted into imperative or command language. As a result,
moral responsibilities are necessary. Kant contrasted hypothetical and categorical imperatives. Most of
the time, whether or not we should do anything is a matter of want rather than morality. If we want
something, we should obey these commands. But you may always choose not to work or study hard.
Morality, for Kant, is not hypothetical. A more categorical approach is required.

The categorical imperative defines this sense of unwavering obligation that we all possess. It is
the root of “the moral law within,” the sensation that we should do or not do certain things no matter
what. Regardless of our wishes, we must obey. For Kant, the moral law is absolute and cannot accept
exceptions.

The Formulations of the Categorical Imperative

The first premise is universalizability. This forces us to step back from our own maxims
and assess their suitability as universal standards. The Golden Rule is similar: “Do unto
others as we would have them do unto us”. It demands universal acceptance of moral
principles.
 The second principle is the Humanity Principle or the Principle of Person Respect. This
phrasing underlines Kant's opinion that worth that comes from rationality alone.
Humans are valuable not only for their contributions to society, but also for their innate
rationality. We are not just tools to be utilized by others. As a rational creature,
someone's inherent worth is violated when they are used as a thing or a mere means for
the good of another.

The Autonomy Principle is the third formulation. This formula focuses on our human
will's ability to influence the environment around us when we follow reason. Aiming to
affect the world, we should think about our desired maxims. Kant means that we must
choose our own moral rules. Kant believes rational will has autonomy.

 Autonomy is self-rule Heteronomy means other-law.

The Fourth Principle is the Kingdom of Ends. His vision is a web of rational beings bound
by shared moral principles. And he implies that everyone's moral destiny is intertwined.
Our collective moral community is a “kingdom of ends,” since Kant sees humans as ends
in themselves. The moral community should be considered when I behave. The moral
community's intended maxim should be evaluated as a whole.

These are some criticisms on Kant’s Ethical Theory:

 Kant’s ethics views moral rules as absolute and exceptionless. The problem comes in when
conflicts between moral rules arise.
 Kant argued that the only worthwhile motive for moral action is duty. And it is acting from duty,
not acting with a sense of duty, that makes us moral. Critics say that this is too unrealistic and
too demanding.
 For Kant, only persons have moral standing as members of the “kingdom of ends”. A person is
someone who must be capable of rational judgment and of deliberating about universal moral
principles, and you must have the power of will to adhere to those principles.