Submitted by: Farzana Rahman Prity

ID: 23301614

Section: 14

Subject: HUM 103: ETHICS AND CULTURE

Submitted to: Neealana Naushin

Date: 18/04/2024

Page count:
Answering Question no. 01

Suppose, you notice that your friend is stealing food from a shop. Will you try to stop him or
ignore the situation? Even though it is an ethical dilemma, your initial response might be to
ignore his crime because he is your friend. Then again, what if the shop owner was your
acquaintance? How would you have dealt with the situation then? This is relevant to the topic of
categorical imperative described by German philosopher, Immanuel Kant. To dive deeper into
this topic, we will explore Kant's first formulation of the categorical imperative, discuss the
distinction between perfect duty and imperfect duty in Kant’s formulation, and provide a detailed
account of the Kantian moral test to show why cheating in an examination would constitute a
violation of a perfect duty.

According to Kant’s book called “Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals”, the first
formulation of the categorical imperative states that, “Act only in accordance with that maxim
through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law” (G 4:421). It is also
called the principle of universalizability. If we break it down into three parts, firstly, “Act only in
accordance with that maxim” means that we must only act keeping the motive clear in our
minds. Secondly, “ which you can at the same time will” means that despite the maxim, there can
be consistency in the moral for it to become a universal law as thirdly it says, “it becomes a
universal law”. In other words, before doing any action, assess whether the underlying idea can
be generally applied without conflict. This formulation highlights the need for consistency and
reason in moral decision-making, as behaviors based on concepts that cannot be effectively
universalized are considered morally objectionable. As a result, it acts as a guide for individuals
in determining the moral permissibility of their conduct by examining whether they could
logically wish their principle of action to turn into universal law.

Besides the categorical imperative, Kant focuses on other topics like perfect and imperfect
duties. Now, what is a duty and what makes it perfect or imperfect? According to Kant’s ethical
system, the activities that are good or morally acceptable for everyone at all times are the perfect
duties. For example: if someone asks us to keep a secret or a promise, we must keep it. If we do
not, it makes us morally wrong. A person makes a promise in the first place to you because he
thinks you are trustworthy. Here the maxim is, we must always keep a promise because if we fail
to do so, it will violate moral conduct. Again, respecting our parents is also another example of
perfect duty. We must, at all times and conditions, respect our parents. If we do not, it makes us
unethical. The maxim is similar to the previous one because parents are the only people in the
world who will love us wholeheartedly from birth to death. They make countless sacrifices and
struggles for our betterment, hence it is only fair if we respect them. Disrespecting them violates
our moral code of conduct. On the other hand, the activities which must be beneficial to others
and ourselves, basically having a situation based maxim that has practical limits, are called
imperfect duties. For example: if we help some strangers, it is not like we are obligated to help
them but if we do then it will be morally acceptable. Because, it is not our duty to help a stranger,
but if we do, it will be appreciated. Here the maxim can be either we like to help people because
we want good for them or helping them makes us feel good or superior in some context. Again,
another example of the imperfect duty is doing charity. It is not compulsory to donate but if we
do it will be done in a moral way. The maxim here is also quite similar to the first one where
charity can be done to help the people or their communities, or it can be done so that we feel
better about ourselves, or even do it to show it to people that we like to do charities in order to
get their praises. Altogether, Kant’s quote can be followed, "Act in such a way that you treat
humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to
an end, but always at the same time as an end."

Finally, we will now provide a detailed account of the Kantian moral test to show why cheating
in an examination would constitute a violation of a perfect duty. Cheating in a test violates a
perfect duty according to Kantian ethics when viewed through the lens of the categorical
imperative. Kant proposed this moral test to establish the moral permissibility of an action by
examining whether the underlying principle might be consistently willed as a universal law. The
maxim behind it is one can either avoid failing the test or earn a better grade through unfair
means. Cheating is dependent on the existence of honest individuals to fool, resulting in a
contradiction in which the act of cheating becomes impossible if everyone cheats. This
contradiction illustrates that cheating cannot be consistently generalized without destroying
itself. Consequently, cheating on an exam violates a perfect duty in Kantian ethics by failing the
categorical imperative's moral test. The principle underlying cheating cannot be persistently
willed as a universal law without jeopardizing the integrity of education, respect for rational
individuals, and the entire concept of cheating. According to Kantian ethics, cheating on a test
violates a perfect duty.

To sum up, the investigation of Kantian morals assists with picking and settling on moral
decisions. Kant's underlying explanation of the all out basic, which features the need of acting as
per rules that might be generally wanted as regulations, offers a thorough moral evaluation for
deciding the reasonability of activities. Utilizing the viewpoint of Kant, we analyzed the contrast
among awesome and flawed liabilities, recognizing the meaning of cognizance and respect for
mankind in a moral way of behaving. At the point when the Kantian moral test is applied to
swindling in an assessment, it becomes clear that cheating disregards an ideal obligation. This is
on the grounds that cheating subverts the respectability of school systems and considers people
as straightforward instruments to accomplish an ideal result. In a general sense, Kant's ethical
design gives major perspectives on the most capable technique to really manage moral
difficulties and keep up with moral standards that go past confidential tendencies and
inspirations. Kantian ethics give an enduring and critical design for investigating moral situations
and propelling sensibility and significant quality in the public eye.
Reference:

1. Wood, A. W. (1999). Kant’s Ethical Thought, pp. 17-49. Cambridge University Press.
Common rational moral cognition (Chapter 1) - Kant's Ethical Thought (cambridge.org)

2. Kerstein, Samuel, "Treating Persons as Means", The Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy (Winter 2023 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.)
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2023/entries/persons-means.

Words: 1200

Answering Question no. 02