College of Teacher Education

First Semester, A.Y. 2020-2021

Module 10.1
Deontological Ethics: Immanuel Kant

Course Title: Ethics

Course Code: GE 8

Name: ___________________________________
Course and Year: __________________________
Date and Time Allotment: _______ (3 hours)

Introduction
This module entitled Deontological Ethics will discuss Kantian Theory otherwise known as Deontological
Theory that focuses on duty as the primary factor for determining if an action is good or not. Kantian Ethics is a
deontological theory that emphasizes morality based on duty, reason, moral principle, moral obligation, and motive or
intention. It rejects consequences as the basis of morality. Kantian ethical framework is considered as a Moral
Universalism or Moral Absolutism and Moral Formalism.

I. Objectives:
In this module, you will be able to:
1. Explain the meaning of deontological ethics.
2. Critique Kantian Ethics.
3. Apply Kantian Theory to their moral decisions.

II. Lecture and Discussions of the lesson/s

“Experience without theory is blind, but theory without experience is mere intellectual play.”
- Kant, 1797
Deontological Ethics

Kantian Theory otherwise known as Deontological Theory, focuses on duty as the primary factor for determining
if an action is good or not. In this theory, for one to be considered as good, two tests have to be passed.
1. The universalizability test; and
2. The treatment of humans as an end and not as a means.

During the 2nd World War, a secret

project was launched called the Manhattan
Project. It is such a secret project that even
the then, US Vice President Truman was
not informed until he became President
after the death of Franklin Roosevelt. This
project’s ultimate goal is to build and drop a
bomb before the Axis forces can do the
same. Over two billion dollars will be spent
and around 130 people will be employed. Figure 1. Atomic Bomb
At the time and as the war raged on, Source: www.pinterest .com
thousands of people continue to die. One of the worst losses on the side of the US was in Okinawa, Japan where
around 48,000 Americans died. Thus, after deliberating with his military advisors and convinced that without the
bomb, the war will not end and the attack on Japan will just be another Okinawa, President Truman gave the order
to launch the attack. Operation Olympic (the
Name given to the atomic bombing) was set
Into motion. More than 700,000 marines and soldiers will be deployed. It was however, foreseen that the dropping
of the of the bomb will cause the death of thousands of Americans and Japanese. Despite this, it was decided that
the benefit of dropping the bomb outweighed the foreseen cost.
Therefore, on August 6, 1945, the bomb called ‘Enola Gay’, was dropped on Hiroshima, instantly
vaporizing 60% of the city and killing 70,000 people. The after effects of the bomb took the lives of 140,000 more
people. Despite that, Japan did not surrender and another bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. This time, the bomb
took 20,000 lives (Lyons, 2007).
The case of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing has caught the interest of people and these include the
ethicists who have for years, debated its morality. It has to be noted however that the bombing is accepted
internationally as a legal action since the Hague convention does not consider strategic bombing a war crime. Its
legality and morality, one of the issues raised was should legal action always be moral? This discourse was
analyzed from the point of the greatest influences in philosophy and ethics – Immanuel Kant or otherwise known as
the Kantian Theory.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804, Germany)

“I had to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith.”
- (Kant, 1781)
Trivia: The magnitude of Kant’s intellectual contribution has
fascinated a lot of people. When his body was exhumed for
transferring to another site, his skull was measured and found that
his forehead is larger than that of ordinary German male. Whether
the size of his forehead has any bearing on his genius is a matter of
scientific speculation.

Figure 2: Immanuel Kant
Source: Unidentified Painter
(c.1790/History/Carnegie/kant/portrait.html
Background
Born in 1724, and the fourth among nine children, he was raised in a
Protestant environment. When his father died, he supported his
education by becoming a private tutor. He spent most of his time in
his town in Konigsberg, Prussia.
Some people would say that he has such a strict schedule that
people will even adjust their clock according to his daily walks. In one
of Kant’s accounts, he was awoken from his dogmatic slumber after
he read the book written by David Hume (Kant, 1783). During this
time, he was writing what would later become one of his most
important books, “Critique of Pure Reason” which was finally
published in 1781. However, since it was difficult to understand
version – the Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics, which was
published in 1783.
 Kant and Duty-Based Theories
Adolf Hitler Nearly Drowned When He Was A Child

A story in a newspaper circulated that when

Hitler was a child he nearly drowned in the river of
Passau, Germany in 1894. He does not know how to
swim and the water was icy cold. He was saved from
drowning by another kid, Johann Kuehberger – who
would later on become a priest. (Winston, 2014, War
History Online)
Figure 3: Young and Old Hitler
Source: Winston, G. 2014

The news story is yet to be verified because of different accounts. But assuming that the story is true, what
would have been the morally right action at that time? If you were Johann, would you do the same? However, what if,
knowing how Adolf Hitler will turn out (committing the most atrocious crime against humanity in the history of
mankind), should that boy still be saved from drowning or not? Do we have the duty to save that boy? Or do we have
a duty to humankind and thus, not save the boy?

How important is the intention of one’s ethical behavior?

 In the application of the Kantian Theory, the situation above will be assessed based on the motivation of the
moral agent. Whatever result may happen as consequence of the act is not included in this moral assessment.
Thus, it is possible that though the consequence of the act is not the desired result, or may result in something
bad, still – the act can be considered good. For this theory, it would be unfair to attribute the consequences of
the action on the moral agent because that was not within his control. The moral agent should not be blamed for
bad consequence for as long as the act is done with good intention as guided by good will. It is emphasized here
that a person should be morally judged only on things that are within his control, in short, those that he WILLED.
 Hence, the deontological theory asserts that it is possible for an action to be considered as morally good even if
it results in bad consequences. What determines if the action is good or bad is the WILL.

Good Will
“There is no possibility of thinking of anything at all in the world, or even out of it, which can be regarded as good
without qualification, except a good will.”
- Kant.
(Grounding for a Metaphysics of Morals. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1981, p.7.)

Figure 4: Good Intentions
Source:https://feedyeti.com/hashtag.php?
q=LawofUnintendedConsequences
 In recognizing the will, our moral actions will now be based on what
we try to achieve and not what we have actually achieved. Our
goodness is the result of our efforts and not on the result of the
effort. The success and failure of those efforts is not all because of
the action of the moral agent, thus it cannot wholly be accreted to
that moral agent. An action resulting outside the control of the
moral agent is not within his will, therefore cannot be a factor in the
determination of an act’s morality. For example, I gave alms to
homeless person thinking that it is my duty to help those in need.
My intention was to fulfill that human duty. However, the homeless
person used the alms I gave him to buy a knife that would later use
to kill somebody. In that case, I am not responsible for the killing
because that is already outside of my Will. It should be noted also
that a person’s actions should be based not just on the will but on
the Good Will. But how do we know if the will is good?
 The will is considered good considered good if it is done by free
moral agents whose actions will not succumb to outside forces.

Take for example this situation. Suppose that I am so tired that I suddenly crave for a big slice of chocolate cake.
This desire is so overwhelming that I gave in to that desire. I had a will for cake and I gave in to this will. However,
though I willed it, it doesn’t mean that it’s an act worthy of being morally praised. In this case, my will was influenced
by my desire – which is an outside force. It’s not wrong, but it cannot be considered morally good either. If I allow my
will to be constantly controlled by my desire, then I fail to control my will and thus, failed to assert my action as a
moral agent. This is the reason why animals cannot be held responsible for their actions and cannot be considered
as moral agents because they act on the basis of what nature dictates to them. They do not assert their will over
nature. Therefore, as moral agents, the will must be to control the outside forces and this makes our will autonomous.
An autonomous will is one that is able to stand on its own, and this autonomy is what makes our will good.

How then do we train our will to be autonomous?

Suppose that you have a class on that day where you will
have a lunch with a friend. However, when you woke up you
don’t feel so good and just not feeling like getting out of your
bed. You can do several things.
1. Stay in bed, be absent and not meet your friend. If you
choose this, then your will as subjected to the outside
force of desire. Your action here cannot be said to be of
moral worth because it is neither free nor autonomous.
2. Get up, but still not have lunch with that friend. In this
case, his will was still controlled or;
3. Get up, go to class and have lunch with that friend.

 The third option seems to be the only thing left now.

Figure 5: Mouse being tempted
Source: Kensee, (2018) Dreamstime.com
If the mouse gives in after promising its mom not to eat
cheese, there would be a failure of the test of
autonomous will.
This option passes the test of autonomous will as it has
controlled other forces and committed itself to the
performance of his duty. The will becomes autonomous
if it shaped according to acceptable principles of all
moral agents. Thus, one should, as Kant would put it:
“Act only according to the maxim whereby you can at
the same time will that it should become a universal
law. (Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, 1785)
III. Other References
1. Makie, Gleemoore C., Ethics: Flourishing Life, Research, Statistics, Business Consultancy and Publishing
Company, 2020
2. Pasco M. O., Suàrez V. F., Rodriguez A. G., “Ethics” C&E Publishing, Inc., 2018
3. Bulaong O., Calano M., Lagliva A., Mariano M., Principe J., “Ethics: Foundation of Moral Valuation”, 1st
edition, REX Book Store, 2018
4. Ramos, Carmela, “Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person”, (1st edition), REX Book Store,
2016