Kant

1
Kants Ethics of Duty

• 3 insights form the basis for Kants Ethical
  Theory
• An action has moral worth if it is done for the
  sake of duty. (DUTY)
• An action is morally correct if its maxim can be
  willed as a universal law. (UNIVERSALIZABILITY)
• We should always treat humanity, whether in
  ourselves or other people, as an end in itself
  and never merely as means to an end. (RESPECT)

2
The Ethics of Duty

• Acting for the sake of duty is
• Acting without self-interest
• Acting without concern for consequences
• Acting without inclination downplays the role of
  compassion

3
Immanuel Kant a matter of "duty"

• Before Kant ethics focused on the concept of "the
  good"
• Two questions were asked
• What is "the good"?
• How do we attain it?
• There was no disagreement on the above two
  points.
• The only puzzle was why didn't some people aim at
  the good. Plato said "ignorance". Aristotle said
  weakness of will.

4
How Christianity changed ethics

• In the Christian view
• to act morally a person must see the act is right
  (i.e., it is commanded by GOD) and must do the
  act because they see it is right.
• For Kant Reason, not God, is the source of the
  moral law. We can rephrase the above as
• to act morally a person must see the act is right
  (i.e., it is commanded by REASON) and must do the
  act because they see it is right.

5
The "good will" and duty...

• Kant believed that only a GOOD WILL is morally
  valuable.
• A good will knows what its duty is (that is, the
  good will knows what reason commands it to do.)
• And the good will DOES the dutiful act because
  the good will is dutiful.

6
The nature of the "good will"

• The will determines how our talents and
  temperaments are used. It affects or conditions
  everything else we do.
• Kant argues that some qualities are helpful to
  the good will, such as moderation, self-control
  and "sober reflexion", but they are not good in
  themselves.
• Some talents temperaments are a MEANS to the
  end of a good will , but are not an end in
  themselves.

7
The "good will" and results

• The will is good through its willing alone. Even
  if the good will cannot carry out its intentions,
  it is good in itself.
• According to Kant we should not judge the good
  will by its "fruitfulness".
• fruitfulness the consequences of its willing.
• The good will is to be judged by its motive alone.

8
Reason as the source of the moral law (reason
"commands")

• Kant's premise "nothing in nature is in vain",
  therefore reason must have some function.
• The functions of the preservation of life or the
  gaining of happiness are better performed by
  instinct. examples?
• Thus he concludes that Reason has nothing to do
  with our actions, yet is a practical power -- it
  influences our will.
• Kant concludes that the true function of reason
  is to produce a will that is good.

9
The "Good Will" and Duty

• What does it mean to act from duty?
• It is not enough that an act of a certain kind be
  done
• For example You might, while lying, accidentally
  tell the truth.
• It is not enough that the act is INTENDED
• For example If you are moved by a sudden feeling
  of pity, your act is still without moral value.

10
An Act Must Be Done From Principle

• In order for an act to be done from principle
  there must be a thought-out rule.
• And you must perform the act because you see it
  is an INSTANCE of the rule.
• From slide 2 to act morally a person must see
  the act is right (i.e., it is commanded by
  REASON) and must do the act because they see it
  is right.

11
The Motive of Duty I

• Kant believed that the only motive that makes an
  act morally valuable is that of DUTY
• Kant believed that inclinations other than
  duty, such as love for humanity, are variable in
  nature, as is self-interest.
• He also makes a distinction between
• Acting in conformity with duty (but not for the
  right motive) and
• Acting from the MOTIVE of duty.

12
The Motive of Duty II

• When is the motive of duty easiest to see?
• When the dutiful action is not to your advantage
  that is, causes you pain or loss.
• Kant argues that taking pleasure in giving others
  happiness has no moral worth.
• Duty resides with the will, not with feeling.
  Why? related to the problems with inclinations
  as a basis for ethics

13
3 Propositions and the Formal Principle of Duty

• 1st PROPOSITION This proposition concerns the
  nature of duty.
• We are to act FROM the motive of duty, rather
  than from conformity with duty. We just finished
  discussing this!
• 2nd PROPOSITION is the Formal Principle of Duty
  itself.
• The 3rd PROPOSITION "Duty is the necessity to
  act out of reverence for the law.

14
2nd Proposition The Formal Principle of Duty

• The moral worth of an action done from duty is
  not in the "purpose to be attained, i.e.
  consequences but in the maxim (or law) on which
  the action is decided.
• Moral worth does not come from the consequences
  of the action or from achieving the purpose of
  the action
• The moral worth lies in the "principle of the
  will" -- with "every material principle taken
  away such as inclinations, consequences,
  advantages.

15
3rd PropositionReverence for the Law

• 3rd PROPOSTION "Duty is the necessity to act out
  of reverence for the law.
• If we act for the sake of the OBJECT of our
  actions we can only act in terms of inclination.
  examples?
• Kant is moving towards the notion of the moral
  law as COMMANDED
• We must act from the IDEA OF THE LAW ITSELF
• This is only possible for a rational being
• And this doesn't wait for a "result."

16
The "Categorical Imperative"

• The Categorical Imperative is the means by
  which we determine what the moral law is.
• It states
• "I ought never to act except in such a way that
  I can also will that my maxim should become a
  universal law.
• It means
• that we have to be willing for others to use the
  same moral law that we are using.

17
The Discussion-IIs it prudent, or is it right
to make a false promise?

• Kant is making the argument that looking at the
  consequences of an action won't help us decide
  between
• prudence consequences and
• duty as the justification for a false promise.

18
The Discussion - IIIs it prudent, or is it
right to make a false promise?

• If we try to justify a lying promise on the basis
  of being prudent, we arent always able to see
  the consequences.
• It is also possible that if people lose
  confidence in us, what will happen will be more
  disadvantageous than what will happen now.
  magistrate mob

19
Discussion- III Does a "lying promise" accord
with duty?

• Kant argues that truth for the sake of duty
  contains the moral law
• (In the case of prudence you must look to see
  what the effects will be and doing this does not
  contain the moral law.)

20
Discussion- IV Does a "lying promise" accord
with duty?

• You must ask whether you can universalize your
  maxim. Can you?
• You can will to lie, but you cannot will a
  universal law of lying. Why not?
• So we reject the "lying promise", not because of
  the consequences, but because it cannot be
  enacted as a universal law.

21
Universalizability the Categorical Imperative

• The example of Lying If we will it to be a
  universal law -- we lose the advantage from our
  lying. Consider the matter of Consistency - lying
  loses 2 ways here
• 1. If we imagine the consequences of everyone
  lying we cannot consistently will that
  everyone adopt this maxim.
• 2. OR I cannot consistently will that I lie
  and you dont!
• The requirement of Impartiality Fairness means
  that we cannot make an exception of ourselves.

22
Formulating maxims

• To formulate a maxim correctly you must
• Be sure the act description is formulated
  carefully so it is relevant. Get the right
  description.
• Be sure that the maxim has sufficient generality.
• Be sure it can pass the categorical imperative
  test.
• The maxim needs to be related to the
• 1. motivating reasons of the agent,
• 2. to the act itself and
• 3. to a universal system of reasons.

23
The Second Formulation of the Categorical
Imperative

• We should respect all human beings impartially.
• Because human beings exist as ends in
  themselves we should never use them as mere
  means.
• Kants argument is based on our rationality.
  This is what sets us aside from those things
  that are what he calls objects of inclination.
• The 2 formulations of the Categorical
  Imperative are basically the same according to
  Kant. How so?
• Think What is the connection between acting on a
  universal moral maxim and respecting all human
  beings impartially?

24
Using others as mere means What does it mean?

• Whether we are using a person as a mere
  means can be hard to determine as our motives
  are often mixed, but a mere means situation may
  involve the following characteristics
• deception about true motives
• profiting at another persons expense
• undermining a persons chance to make an informed
  choice tied to deception
• violating certain other maxims we have

25
A Brief Summary

• The moral law is commanded by reason.
• What makes an action morally right is that you
  have a moral maxim that you can universalize.
• It is also wrong to treat people as mere means
• Kant focuses on universality and impartiality
• And these are conditions that are necessary for
  people to be treated freely equally -- i.e.
  with RESPECT

26
Kant Pro Con

• Pro
• It is admirable to act from duty
• Morality should be evenhanded
• The Importance of respect for other persons
• Con
• Maintains the split between duty and inclination
• Ignores the role of the emotions in morality
• Ignores the place for consequences in morality

27
What ways are available to resolve moral problems?

• Evaluate the consequences of the alternatives.
  UTILITARIANISM
• Believe that the right action will flow from our
  having formed good moral habits ARISTOTLE
• Act from the correct motive KANT
• MOTIVES can be based in feeling or reason
• Kant believes that REASON makes more stable,
  universal impartial decisions possible

28
KANT Summary

• We are to act on the basis of duty what reason
  commands
• It is the good will that reason creates that
  enables us to do this.
• Our reverence for the moral law will help us find
  what our duty is.
• Instead of looking at consequences use the
  following principles.
• Can you universalize your moral maxim?
• Are you using a person as a mere means?

29
Ask yourself

• What do Kants 2 principles ensure about the
  decision we make ? That it is --
• STABLE reason not emotion also not
  consequences
• UNIVERSAL everyone could use your maxim
• IMPARTIAL reason universalizability
• OBJECTIVE reason no emotion