For example, if I want to be a good basketball player I ought to practice free throws or if I want to go to law school I ought to take a logic class. In fact, these oughts are entirely dependent upon my goals or interests. Hypothetical imperatives are the oughts that direct my actions provided I have certain goals or interests. An imperative is essentially a ought something I ought to do. Kant recognizes that there are different types of imperatives in his distinction between a hypothetical and a categorical imperative. Duties are imperatives in the sense that they tell us what to do. The other two act only in conformity with duty–they are driven by some other goal or desire aside from duty itself.ĭuties are principles that guide our actions. However, for Kant, only one of the young men’s actions have moral worth and it is Man C he understands what his moral duty is and he acts from it. If we were looking at this from a utilitarian perspective, all three of the young men would be morally praiseworthy because in all three cases, happiness or well-being is increased (or pain is relieved). The results of all three individuals are the same–the woman is helped across the street. Man C decides he will help the woman across the street because it is the right thing to do he understands that he has a moral obligation to help others in need when he can. So, Man B helps her because he reasons that he will be rewarded. Wilson makes the best cookies in the neighborhood. Man B decides he will help the woman across the street because he recognizes her as his neighbor, Mrs. Man A decides he will help the woman across the street because if he didn’t he would feel guilty all day. To illustrate this distinction, let’s take the example of three young men who see an elderly woman needing help across the street. Kant recognizes that it is difficult to determine one’s intentions, so he makes a distinction between acting in conformity with duty and acting from duty. Accordingly, the will is a good will provided it acts from duty. This leads Kant to claim that the good will is the only thing good without qualification–or the only thing that is intrinsically good. We value courage, but a suicide bomber also exhibits courage. For example, we value knowledge, but such can be used to commit atrocities in the world, so knowledge is good sometimes. If we think about the other goods and things that we value, such are not good without qualification. To clarify, Kant thinks the good will is the only thing that is intrinsically valuable. Morality is defined by duties and one’s action is moral if it is an act motivated by duty.Īccording to Kant the only thing that is good in itself is the “good will.” The will is what drives our actions and grounds the intention of our act. For Kant, morality is not defined by the consequences of our actions, our emotions, or an external factor. Morally speaking, Kant is a deontologist from the Greek, this is the science of duties.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |