Kant , Categorical Imperative

In: Philosophy and Psychology

Submitted By fshawwa
Words 436
Pages 2
What does Kant mean by the “categorical imperative?
Kants claims that an action is right if it conforms to a moral rule. The rules that we consider right or wrong is what Kant calls categorical imperative. (an imperative that Kant expresses as requiring that a person must never perform an act unless he or she can consistently determine that the maxim or rule that motivated the action could become a universal law. If there is deemed to be a universal law that any human being can interpret then this would constitute a categorical or exceptionless imperative.
Kant also discussed a second formulation of categorical imperative which is just as important as the first formation. This would be to treat people as ends in themselves and never merely as means. An example of this is to acknowledge teachers, parents, and educators rather than assuming that their services are expected.
For Kant, the morally important thing is not consequences but the way choosers think when they make choices.
Kant says that only one kind of thing is inherently good, and that is the good will.
What makes the will good? The will is good when it acts out of duty, not out of inclination.
What does it mean to act out of inclination? To do something because it makes you feel good or because you hope to gain something from it.
What does it mean to act out of duty? Kant says this means that we should act from respect for the moral law.
How do we do that? We must know what the moral law is.
How do we know that? We use the "Categorical Imperative."
The Categorical Imperative is a rule for testing rules.
Basically it requires the following steps: 1) Before you act, consider the maxim or principle on which you are acting Generalize that principle. If, once generalized, it no longer makes any sense because it contradicts itself, then it is wrong to use that maxim as a basis for…...

Similar Documents

Utilitarianism and Kant's Categorical Imperative

...Utilitarianism and Kant’s Categorical Imperative The issues of morality are most clearly expressed through examples of different methods of analyzing a situation. The case of Holmes, an officer in charge of a sinking ship, shows the striking differences between philosopher Immanuel Kant’s beliefs and those of the Utilitarians. After Holmes’ ship sinks, there are twenty passengers in a lifeboat that is only meant to hold fourteen people. There was no time to send out a signal for help before the ship sank, so no rescue is guaranteed and the nearest land is fifteen hundred miles away. Holmes decides to force the wounded passengers and those wearing life jackets off of the lifeboat and make his way to shore without them. This action can be described as either moral or immoral depending on the way morality is perceived. One perspective on morality is that of the Utilitarian view. Utilitarianism states that an act is morally right in proportion as it tends to secure the greatest utility, pleasure, or happiness for the greatest number; wrong as it tends to produce disutility, pain, or unhappiness. This means that what is morally right can be decided by what action will create the most pleasure for the most people. It can be said that Utilitarians “measure” each deciding factor to determine what is morally right, as if it were part of a mathematical formula. The values of different sources of pleasure and pain can be based on many considerations including: intensity,......

Words: 1368 - Pages: 6


...morality introducing the ideals of the categorical imperative as the central concept of moral philosophy. The definition of the categorical imperative leads Kant towards the critique of pure reason arguing that without a goodwill one can’t even be worthy of being happy. Kant introduces goodwill, treating people as means rather than ends and doing the right thing for the right reason. Making a distinction between science and knowledge and eliminating common sense on a route to the philosophical, Kant defines reason as reason a practical faculty to influence will and also being essential to will. Kant argument in the Groundwork focuses upon the basic idea of what makes a good person good. It is the possession of a will that is a way determined by, or makes decision based of moral law. This goodwill is supposed to be the idea of one who only makes decisions that she holds to be morally worthy, taking moral considerations in themselves to be conclusive reasons for guiding her behavior. This sort of disposition or character is something we all highly value. Kant believes we value it without limitation or qualification. Formulated by pure reason, the categorical imperative according to Kant underscores his argument. The value of a good will thus cannot be that it secures certain valuable ends, whether of our own or of others, since there value is entirely conditional on our having and maintaining a good will. Kant’s categorical imperative argues that ones actions should be......

Words: 597 - Pages: 3

Main Principle's of Kant's Categorical Imperative

...Explain the main principles of Kant’s Categorical Imperative. (25) Kant believed that a moral action is made up of duty and good will. Without duty, an action cannot be morally good. This is how he developed the duty-based Categorical Imperative, also known as moral commands, as a foundation for all other rules and will be true in any circumstance purely based on reason. These tell everyone what to do and don’t depend on anything else, such as personal desires. Within the Categorical Imperative, Kant outlines three important maxims in ‘The Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals’ which test how morally acceptable an action is. The first maxim states: “Always act in such a way that you can also will that the maxim of your action should be a universal law”. This can be interpreted to mean that only do something if it can be universalised and if it’s something that will always be acceptable for anyone to do. If it can’t be universalised then it is not a valid moral rule. To illustrate this, Kant uses the example of suicide, claiming that it is always wrong because it can’t be made a universal law. He asks us to consider if we would want everyone to take their own life in any situation, even if it is to escape a state of suffering and despair. Stealing would also be considered never to be morally acceptable in Kantian Ethics since it cannot be universalised as well. If it was to be universalised, everyone would be stealing from each other, therefore human relationships would...

Words: 637 - Pages: 3

Abortion and the Categorical Imperative

...Abortion and the Categorical Imperative: Refusing an abortion to a pregnant woman who does not wish to bear a child violates the principle that one must always treat other human beings as an ends, never only as a means. By refusing abortion, the pregnant woman would be treated as a means, and even if the fetus were considered human, it would be treated as a means as well. Denying access to abortion treats the pregnant woman as a means. Many arguments against abortion involve a concern for protecting the rights of the fetus. But by prohibiting the pregnant woman from having an abortion, she is being treated as a means by which to bring another human being into existence. Telling her that she has no choice but to have the baby is essentially treating her as a vessel by which a life is to be born out of, rather than a human being with the right to decide whether or not she should bring a new life into the world. Callahan discussed how embryonic life can only exist from a woman’s participation in the genetic inheritance of the human species as a whole (1. Callahan, Reader, pg. 17). In other words, the woman’s baby is her contribution to the genetic inheritance of the human species as a whole. Callahan would argue that in having the baby regardless of whether she wanted it or not, she is acting according to the categorical imperative in that she is acting for humankind and not in anticipation of her own well-being or cost-benefit (2. Callahan, Reader, pg. 17).......

Words: 1835 - Pages: 8


...reason. It is important to note that Kant began a new way of looking at knowledge. He believed that we could know the world through reason in a prior synthetic way. This was a complete change from how the world had been view previously and was known as Kant’s Copernican revolution. In essence Kant believed in two separate worlds of knowledge: noumenal and the phenomenal worlds. The noumenal world is the world as it truly is without being observed. It is fundamentally unknowable because the act of observation changes the very thing that we observe. It is as though human beings have a specific set of spectacles that cannot be taken off and like the proverbial rose tinted ones they change our perception of the world around us. This personalised view of the universe is the phenomenal world. However, what is key to explaining Kant’s moral argument is the fact that reason is the tool that can be used to know the true nature of the universe as it does not and cannot change. Kant’s moral argument focuses on reason, good will, duty and the notion that we ought to strive towards moral perfection. It begins with the claim of two things that have him in awe: the starry heavens above; and the moral law within. This moral law for Kant was universal and objective. An example of this might be seen in the wide scale agreement that murder or torture is wrong. There seems to be agreement across cultures that certain actions are intrinsically wrong. This, for Kant, suggests that there is a......

Words: 2616 - Pages: 11


...order for us to make moral judgments upon our actions, Immanuel Kant provides a guideline for which actions are morally commendable in his text, “Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals”. He believes that an action is morally right when it is motivated by duty alone. Kant introduces the concept of rational beings, in which he defines it as beings with the capacity to act in accordance with the representations of laws or a will (4:412). According to Kant, we are considered to be imperfect rational beings, in which our rational capacities are influenced by various incentives, and therefore, we must be governed by a moral command that will tell us how to act accordingly with the law. In a broad sense, the law is equally valid for all rational beings, and ought to follow is what Kant refers to as the “moral law” (4:227). And the moral command can exist in two forms, either hypothetical or categorical, but only one of which is ideal for the purpose of the moral (4:412). Hypothetical imperative tells us to exercise our wills in respect of our desire for personal ends, and it follows a form: “if you want achieve a goal A, you ought to do B”. For instance, if you want to pass the chemistry exam, then you ought to study for it. Although hypothetical imperative can be universally valid, it cannot be a moral law because it only apply for those who are seeking for the similar ends. On the other hand, categorical imperative is a moral command on how you ought to act, independent of......

Words: 1213 - Pages: 5

The Categorical Imperative

...The Categorical Imperative Immanual Kant Kant argues that all imperatives are commanded either hypothetically or categorically. The hypothetical imperative says that an action is good only as a means to something else. Hypothetical imperatives tell us about which means will be best to achieve our ends; however, they do not tell us anything about the ends we should choose. The categorical imperative says one should act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. In other words, Kant is saying that the nature of a moral act is one which would be the right thing to do for any person in similar circumstances. An example Kant uses to explain this theory involves a man who finds himself in need of money and plans to borrow money but he knows that he will not be able to repay the lender. When we consider how it would be if his maxim became a universal law we see that it is contradicting. A law that says that anyone can promise something with the intention of not fulfilling it would make the promise and its end to be accomplished by it impossible. He goes on to explain that “things” have only a relative worth as means while on the other hand rational beings are designated “persons,” because they are ends themselves and may not be used merely as means. The practical imperative states that you act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a means......

Words: 297 - Pages: 2

Kant Imperative Formulation

... 18th century German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) presents a criterion of moral obligation, which he calls the categorical imperative. Kant rejects these traditional theories of morality and argues instead that moral actions are based on a "supreme principle of morality" which is objective, rational, and freely chosen: the categorical imperative. Kant’s clearest account of the categorical imperative is in the Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals. Kant argues against traditional criteria of morality, and explains why the categorical imperative can be the only possible standard of moral obligation. He begins with a general account of willful decisions. The function of the human will is to select one course of action from among several possible courses of action (for example, my choice to watch television right now instead of going jogging). Our specific willful decisions are influenced by several factors, such as laziness, immediate emotional gratification, or what is best in the end. Kant argues that in moral matters the will is ideally influenced only by rational considerations, and not by subjective considerations such as one’s emotions. This is because morality involves what is necessary for us to do (e.g., you must be benevolent), and only rational considerations can produce necessity. The rational consideration, which influences the will, must be a single principle of obligation, for only principles can be......

Words: 1163 - Pages: 5

Explain the Role of Kants Categorical Imperative

..... Explain the role of the categorical imperative within Kant’s theory A Categorical Imperative is a should statement, but it is not based on experience, and doesn’t rely on outcome. Instead, it precedes experience by using logic, or helps us make sense of our experiences. When considering another are of thinking, Kant showed that we must assume that time moves forwards, but also that our mind forces this on our experiences to make sense of them. Therefore as human beings we could never demonstrate or prove this through experience. This is how the categorical imperative works: certain actions are logically inconsistent and would make no sense as universal laws, such as lying. Therefore, ‘Do not lie’ is a categorical imperative and it’s this understanding that our mind plays an active role in ordering and determining our experience was ground-breaking. Kant states the categorical imperative as follows:” I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law”. This quote specifically highlights the true nature of the categorical imperative within Kant’s ethical theory. Another interpretation of the categorical imperative is that it is supposed to provide a way for us to evaluate moral actions and to make moral judgments. It is not a command to perform specific actions; it is simply formal procedure by which to evaluate any action about which might be morally relevant. According to Kant, the moral law is universal...

Words: 512 - Pages: 3

Explore Kant's Theory of the Categorical Imperative

...Immanuel Kant, an influential theologian in the late 1700s, developed many theories relating to human nature and morality, most focusing on deontological, or absolute, ethics – ethics that focused on a moral act, rather than the consequences that followed it. Kant’s most important belief was that humans had many duties, one of the most important of those duties being not to lie. He then went on to say that, as it is our duty to always tell the truth, we should not falter on that, no matter what. Be believed that faltering in your duty was morally wrong, no matter what. He used an example of a murderer chasing their victim. If the victim had passed you and the murderer stopped to ask you where their victim had gone, you would be obliged to tell them the location of their victim – because then you would be doing your duty, even if harm were to come to the victim. Though an extreme example, Kant used this to explain the relationship between humans. He believed that if humans were to lie all the time, nothing anyone said would hold any value and no written documents would ever be a trustworthy source of information because no-one would be able to trust anyone else. This would ensure the fall of human beings, because a society built upon distrust would never thrive. So, to Kant, honesty was one of the most important parts of a human’s duty that could never be compromised in any situation for fear of destroying the human race. This absolute dedication to reliability of the......

Words: 504 - Pages: 3

The Golden Rule vs. Categorical Imperative

...Immanuel Kant defines duty as the recognition of a moral obligation to do what is right, 100% of the time, regardless of what could come of it. Also, Kant states that in order for an act to be wholly moral, it must be carried out by a sense of duty. This type of obligation termed by Kant is called the “categorical imperative.” The categorical imperative, according to Kant, acts as a basis to which moral requirements stem from. The categorical imperative also equates to Catholicism’s’ “golden rule” in that they both call for treating human beings as ends, not as means. Duty, according to Kant, has four motives, self-interest, self-preservation, sympathy, and happiness. Kant goes on to explain that we all have a sense of moral duty that is innate in us at birth. When we have feelings of guilt, this is the end result when we have done something that has infringed this moral duty. To Kant, to act moral is to obey the moral laws, which are in us at birth, which is our duty. For example, giving a beggar money for the soul purpose of getting he or she to leave you alone is not an example of a moral duty according to Kant. Instead, he believes that a more genuine example would be someone who gives the beggar money regardless of his or her own self interest, for a reason that does not benefit him or her in any way. If a person acts in a way that benefits others while also benefiting themselves, they are not acting truly moral according to Kant’s definition. For example, doctors help...

Words: 1509 - Pages: 7

Explain How the Various Formulations of the Categorical Imperatives Might Be Applied to an Ethical Issue? [25]

...Explain how the various formulations of the Categorical Imperatives might be applied to an ethical issue? [25] Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is best known for his ‘Copernican Revolution’ in the theory of knowledge. He argued that space, time and causality were features of the way our minds organise experience, rather than features of the external world. Kant’s ethical theory was deontological and absolute. We use reason for morality acceptance. His categorical imperatives are part of Kant’s ethical theory, they require the sense of reason (which he believed that a human possess). He believed that if you combined ones duty with goodwill it will result in a moral act. Mixed emotions will not do in a moral situation, you need to exclude all possible emotions to make a perfect moral action. This will then result to summum bonum (an afterlife with God). However, to work out what your duty is, is an ethical dilemma. We can link Kant’s Categorical Imperatives (CI) to euthanasia. Euthanasia is terminating a patients life, painlessly, who is suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. Terminating someone's life can be voluntary (someone helps a person die) or involuntary ( where a patient is capable of ending their own life). Euthanasia can also be passive (food and water deprivation) or active (injected a patient with a medicine which will painlessly kill them). There are many churches and religions which will deny this mercy killing. Natural law......

Words: 923 - Pages: 4

Categorical Imperative

...Costumbres en disputa. Los muiscas y el Imperio español en Ubaque, siglo XVI. Santiago Muñoz Arbeláez’s work demonstrates convincingly that there is still much to be learned and written about the Spanish conquest of America. In his desire to deepen our understanding of a particular colonial society the author presents a detailed study of the institution of the encomienda in the Muisca valley of Ubaque in the Andes southeast of Santa Fé de Bogotá. This focused analysis allows him to comment upon the 16th century Spanish imperial project, and to compare that Hispanic context to other Atlantic systems, as he explores the interactions between particular native leaders caciques, the encomenderos who were granted access to tribute in the valley, and the colonial church and state. To achieve this, he focuses upon the colonial reorganization of geographic spaces and landscapes, the evolution of a colonial economy in the valley and its eventual integration into the Atlantic economy, the ways in which the Muisca used the colonial legal system, and the various identities that were created through the conversion project. In focusing on the 16th century and a particular institution and place he engages several literatures to contextualize the interdisciplinary methodologies and approaches he uses to reveal the cultural variables that exerted influence on the elaboration of early colonial society in Nueva Granada. Concentrating upon the functioning of encomienda and using a broad......

Words: 546 - Pages: 3

Kant's Categorical Imperative

...The Categorical Imperative Analyzing Immanuel Kant’s Grounding for A Metaphysics of Morals Anders Bordum WP 4/2002 January 2002 MPP Working Paper No. 4/2002 © January 2002 ISBN: 87-91181-06-2 ISSN: 1396-2817 Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy Copenhagen Business School Blaagaardsgade 23B DK-2200 Copenhagen N Denmark Phone: +45 38 15 36 30 Fax: +45 38 15 36 35 E-mail: as.lpf@cbs.dk www.cbs.dk/departments/mpp 2 The Categorical Imperative Analyzing Immanuel Kant's Grounding for a Metaphysics of Morals By Anders Bordum Keywords: Categorical imperative, discourse ethics, duty, ethics, monologic, dialogic, Immanuel Kant, Jürgen Habermas, self-legislation, self-reference. 3 Abstract In this article I first argue that Immanuel Kant’s conception of the categorical imperative is important to his philosophy. I systematically, though indirectly, interconnect the cognitive and moral aspects of his thinking. Second, I present an interpretation of the Kantian ethics, taking as my point of departure, the concept of the categorical imperative. Finally, I show how the categorical imperative is given a dialogical interpretation by Jürgen Habermas in his approach, usually referred to as discourse ethics. I argue that the dialogical approach taken by discourse ethics is more justifiable and therefore more usefuli. I The Synthesis of Rationalism and Empiricism The philosophy of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is in the main......

Words: 10855 - Pages: 44

Categorical Imperative

...Kant's Categorical Imperative Deontology is the ethical view that some actions are morally forbidden or permitted regardless of consequences. One of the most influential deontological philosophers in history is Immanuel Kant who developed the idea of the Categorical Imperative. Kant believed that the only thing of intrinsic moral worth is a good will. Kant says in his work Morality and Rationality “The good will is not good because of what it affects or accomplishes or because of it’s adequacy to achieve some proposed end; it is good only because of it’s willing, i.e., it is good of itself”. A maxim is the generalized rule that characterizes the motives for a person’s actions. For Kant, a will that is good is one that is acting by the maxim of doing the right thing because it is right thing to do. The moral worth of an action is determined by whether or not it was acted upon out of respect for the moral law, or the Categorical Imperative. Imperatives in general imply something we ought to do however there is a distinction between categorical imperatives and hypothetical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives are obligatory so long as we desire X. If we desire X we ought to do Y. However, categorical imperatives are not subject to conditions. The Categorical Imperative is universally binding to all rational creatures because they are rational. Kant proposes three formulations the Categorical Imperative in his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Moral, the Universal Law......

Words: 1540 - Pages: 7