Eichmann In Jerusalem: Applications Of Kant's Theory

Applications of Kant’s Theory
In Eichmann in Jerusalem: a report on the banality of evil, Hannah Arendt recorded Eichmann’s justification of murdering millions of Jews during the Nuremberg Trials. Eichmann used Kant’s theory of categorical imperative to argue that he should be not held accountable for murder because the ethic of his action was in accordance with that of the general laws during war time. Eichmann also claimed that it was not his own will to kill, but purely to perform his duty of obeying his superiors. Defending Kant’s theory against Eichmann’s misuse, Arendt argued that Eichmann distorted the categorical imperative and misinterpreted Kant’s concept of duty. From this historical misuse of Kant’s theory, we learned that Kant
Arendt argued that Eichmann was not acting in accordance with Kant’s theory of categorical imperative because the laws established by the legislators or by the state, as interpreted by Eichmann, were not considered as general laws by Kant. Arendt added that Kant’s moral philosophy is “closely bound up with man’s faculty of judgement” (Arendt 136). Thus, Eichmann’s argument could be immediately ruled out because he was not using his own judgement but rather blindly obeying that of his superiors. Furthermore, Kant’s theory required that the principle of general laws to be applicable in a system which the laws can be applied to every individual. Eichmann’s case failed to satisfy this requirement because a murderer would not wish to live under a legal system that would allow others to murder him. Arendt also demonstrated that Eichmann’s justification of duty was invalid because it contradicted with Kant’s words which “every man was a legislator the moment he started to act” (Arendt 136). Kant’s remark determined that Eichmann’s action was grounded by Eichmann’s own will, and he should be responsible of his actions. Further diminishing Eichmann’s grounds, Arendt added that, regardless of whether Eichmann was the master of his own deeds, he was not obeying the duty of his superiors because they ordered him to stop executing the Final
For example, Eichmann tried to apply Kant’s theory of categorical imperative and the notion of duty in an attempt to acquit himself from murder. The commonly misuse of Kant’s theory, whether intentionally or not, suggested that Kant could have present more real life applications of his theories in his works to guide and regulate the exercising of them. For example, when introducing the concept of a universal law in his Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant did not provide any real life applications, rather than solely presenting and justifying his claims (Kant 4:402). Kant could have inserted a few applications, such as people value their lives. This application would discourage people, such as Eichmann, to refer to this concept when justifying their immoral