Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Kantian Ethics / Ethics ~ Philosophy of Religion ~ Continuation (KANT'…
Kantian Ethics / Ethics ~ Philosophy of Religion ~ Continuation
KANT'S
THREE POSTULATES:
Freedom
and the
summum bonum
Immorality
God
KANT postulated three things that were necessary for his ethical theory to work, but which must rationally exist.
Freedom:
This postulate is often termed as autonomy which is at the core of KANT'S ethics. For KANT, freedom is 'the highest degree of life' and the 'inner worth of the world.' Freedom means the freedom to choose the moral law over our instinct or desire. Rational creatures are free but they gain this freedom by adopting a law of action whereby maxims are universalised. Moral choices are only possible if we are free to make them. The autonomy of the will is the foundations of KANT'S philosophy. If we restricted or controlled (thereby no freedom), we do not have moral responsibility.
KANT noted that if we are to do our duty then we must be able to be rewarded for our actions.
Summum bonum
is the highest most supreme good and a place where our happiness and our virtue (good actions through doing our duty) come together. The summum bonum evidently is not on earth and so it is achieved in the afterlife.
Immorality:
We must postulate immorality of the soul to allow the correct happiness to be ensured beyond this life. Some people believe that in after this one comes heaven. KANT thought that human beings had the opportunity for endless improvement, or endless striving for improvement beyond death. Human beings are then immoral to achieve a greater future, a
summum bonum
.
God:
KANT'S ethics could be seen as an attempt to step away from a theological starting point. KANT sought to develop an ethical theory that did not being with the nature of God. However. some of his ethics employ elements of God such as the idea of an eternal law; humans are created rational creatures. KANT'S belief of immorality and the notion of summum bonum ensures ultimate happiness that is distributed in accordance with the moral acts that people have done. This shares similarities to God who ensured that in the end, the world was arranged to ensure the highest good in the end.
DISCUSSING KANTIAN ETHICS:
Is Kantian ethics a helpful method of moral decision making?
[+] KANT'S thinking and central importance to human beings having unconditional worth, so they are never treated as means to an end, compliments how the contemporary world views life; the value and precious nature of it. Rationality seems to be an aspect of great importance to human life and connects with the Judeo Christian tradition about the sanctity of life.
[-] However,
POJMAN
questions how we should consider people with different levels of reason and rationality. If it is an intrinsic good, then surely people with more reason are more intrinsically more valuable than those with less.
[-] Putting duty above everything else and placing emphasis on universalisation seems cold and inhuman as it leaves no room for actions that result from love or compassion. The categorical imperative is absolute and rigid which can be limiting to as human nature is to have feelings and emotions when making moral decisions. - we are sentient beings so this approach seems inhuman. As well as this, arguably, duty may not always be the best motive as it can leave more issues arising than resolution. Therefore, the outcome may be more important than the decision-making process.
[-]
THOMAS NAGEL
and
BERNARD WILLIAMS
argue that KANT'S moral philosophy is not fatally flawed because it does not take into account the consequences of a moral decision. Instead, it is damaged because it ignores the circumstances of a moral action. This is known as moral luck. An individual may think they are doing good by doing x but the circumstances of their actions may cause hard.
More discussion...
KANT'S theory places strong emphasis on the process of moral decision making in that an individual should act out of pure motives, focused on serving duty rather than external factors, such as internal emotions like love. For KANT, morality should not be determined by emotions or judgements about the result of the moral action. Moral behaviour is about human improvement as well as action in themselves. By striving to act properly, we become happier and so does society.
KANT'S philosophy is a strong and idealised view of moral action and arguably, too idealised as it is not always clear what our duty is. Human beings are fallible and easily coerced by many influences in inner motives.
Are Kantian ethics too abstract to be applicable to practical moral decision making?
KANT provides a powerful idealised concept of morality, bringing attention to the worth of a person and the strong sense of universalisation that is not impacted by human emotion. However, these features of KANT'S ethics present practical issues. It requires an individual to separate themselves from their emotions and focus on certain principles in order to decide what to do. This is difficult to do, especially with the added pressure of making a moral decision. Therefore, KANT can be criticised for being too unrealistic about the expectation he places on people. Human beings are imperfect and the moral law can feel like a constraint or oppressor rather than a helpful tool provided to make a moral decision.