KantKant

Are there absolute moral laws that Are there absolute moral laws that we have to follow regardless of we have to follow regardless of consequences?consequences?

First we want to know what Kant has First we want to know what Kant has to say about what moral rule we to say about what moral rule we ought to follow.ought to follow.

2 Types of Commands or 2 Types of Commands or ImperativesImperatives

Hypothetical Imperatives – “If you Hypothetical Imperatives – “If you desire Y, then you ought to do X”desire Y, then you ought to do X”

Hypothetical imperatives are conditioned Hypothetical imperatives are conditioned on your actually desiring some outcome. on your actually desiring some outcome.

The imperative only has motivational The imperative only has motivational force if you do desire the outcome that force if you do desire the outcome that the action promises.the action promises.

Categorical Imperatives – “You ought Categorical Imperatives – “You ought to do X”to do X”

Morality does not depend on our having Morality does not depend on our having certain desires.certain desires.

Categorical imperatives are commands Categorical imperatives are commands that we follow regardless of our personal that we follow regardless of our personal end or desires.end or desires.

Fundamental Principle of Morality is Fundamental Principle of Morality is a Categorical Imperative a Categorical Imperative

1. Act only according to that maxim by 1. Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.should become a universal law.

2. Act as though the maxim of your action 2. Act as though the maxim of your action were by your will to become a universal were by your will to become a universal law of nature.law of nature.

3. Act so that you treat humanity, whether in 3. Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or that of another, always your own person or that of another, always as an end and never as a means only.as an end and never as a means only.

Application of the C.I.Application of the C.I.

Application of the categorical imperative Application of the categorical imperative results in moral rules that are results in moral rules that are absolute, absolute, i.e., admit of no exceptions i.e., admit of no exceptions

Applied to the judgment of specific Applied to the judgment of specific actions: If action could become actions: If action could become universal law, then it is morally correct.universal law, then it is morally correct.

Examples: suicide; borrow money Examples: suicide; borrow money knowing you can’t repay it; charity; knowing you can’t repay it; charity; indolent manindolent man

Justification of the Categorical Justification of the Categorical ImperativeImperative

1. Nothing is intrinsically good but a 1. Nothing is intrinsically good but a good will: all other goods, such as good will: all other goods, such as happiness, intellectual eminence are happiness, intellectual eminence are worthless or positively evil when not worthless or positively evil when not combined with a good will.combined with a good will.

2. A good will is one that habitually wills 2. A good will is one that habitually wills rightly.rightly.

3. The rightness or wrongness of a 3. The rightness or wrongness of a volition depends wholly on its motive.volition depends wholly on its motive.

Implication of the C. I.Implication of the C. I.

Does not depend on consequences.Does not depend on consequences. To do something right requires that To do something right requires that

we do it for the right reason.we do it for the right reason. An action can have a proper outcome An action can have a proper outcome

with out it being moral. (Amoral, with out it being moral. (Amoral, Immoral, Moral actions)Immoral, Moral actions)

Any action which is right or wrong in Any action which is right or wrong in a given situation must be wrong for a given situation must be wrong for any any rational being.rational being.

Primacy of Rationality in Kant’s Primacy of Rationality in Kant’s Theory Theory

Because people have desires and goals, other Because people have desires and goals, other things have value for them – things have value for them – we give other things we give other things value.value.

Human beings are valuable in and of themselves.Human beings are valuable in and of themselves. They have their own “They have their own “intrinsic worth”intrinsic worth” i.e., “ i.e., “dignity” dignity” that is that is

““above all price”above all price” Value of human beings stems from the fact that they are Value of human beings stems from the fact that they are

rational agentsrational agents: free agents capable of making their own : free agents capable of making their own decisions, setting goals and guiding their conduct by decisions, setting goals and guiding their conduct by reason.reason.

We cannot treat individuals as things because they We cannot treat individuals as things because they are the source of moral goodness.are the source of moral goodness.

To treat a person as an To treat a person as an “end in themselves”“end in themselves” means means respecting their rationality.respecting their rationality.

Problems with the Kantian Problems with the Kantian ApproachApproach

Anscomb: proper way to construct Anscomb: proper way to construct moral maxims.moral maxims.

Conflicts between absolute moral Conflicts between absolute moral rules: Dutch fisherman example.rules: Dutch fisherman example.

Are all categorical imperatives Are all categorical imperatives actually hypothetical.actually hypothetical.

Mill’s criticism of Kantian ethics – Kant Mill’s criticism of Kantian ethics – Kant himself is appealing to consequences himself is appealing to consequences in evaluating which maxims to accept.in evaluating which maxims to accept.

Kant on Retributive JusticeKant on Retributive Justice

UtilitarianismUtilitarianism Punishment increases the amount of suffering in Punishment increases the amount of suffering in

the world.the world. Punishment may be justified if it:Punishment may be justified if it:

Helps prevent crimeHelps prevent crime Well designed punishment may help rehabilitate Well designed punishment may help rehabilitate

criminalscriminals Utilitarian rationale is close to our current Utilitarian rationale is close to our current

notions of crime and punishmentnotions of crime and punishment ““prison” = “correctional facility”prison” = “correctional facility” ““guard” = “ corrections officerguard” = “ corrections officer educational programs/counseling/workeducational programs/counseling/work

KantianismKantianism Punishment is acceptable because it is what Punishment is acceptable because it is what

the criminal deserves.the criminal deserves. Punishing prisoners as a way of preventing Punishing prisoners as a way of preventing

crime is using people as a means to an end.crime is using people as a means to an end. Rehabilitation is a violation of the autonomy Rehabilitation is a violation of the autonomy

rights of the individual to choose what sort rights of the individual to choose what sort person they want to be.person they want to be.

People should be punished simply because People should be punished simply because they have committed a crime.they have committed a crime.

Punishment for crime should be Punishment for crime should be proportionalproportional – – seriousness of the crime determines the seriousness of the crime determines the penalty.penalty.

Justification of PunishmentJustification of Punishment

1. We must treat people as an end-in-1. We must treat people as an end-in-themselvesthemselves

2. To treat someone as an end is to treat 2. To treat someone as an end is to treat them as a rational beingthem as a rational being

3. To treat someone as a rational being is to 3. To treat someone as a rational being is to treat a person as capable of reasoning treat a person as capable of reasoning about his or her conduct and freely about his or her conduct and freely deciding what he or she will do.deciding what he or she will do.

4. When we decide what to do to those who 4. When we decide what to do to those who do wrong to us we look to the do wrong to us we look to the categorical categorical imperativeimperative they have endorsed by their they have endorsed by their own actions.own actions.