Immanuel Kant Deontological System Essay
On the four deontological systems that we have discussed, I would like to share my thoughts about the Kantian Deontological System. Kantian Ethics is formulated by Immanuel Kant in which he discussed that the nature of duty is based on human reason. For him, human reason, not human nature, can determine what is right and wrong. He also stressed that human desires are not the right measurement for ethics. In addition, Kantian Ethics is known for its two kinds of command or imperative: the hypothetical and categorical imperative. According to Immanuel Kant, hypothetical imperative has conditions and has no value. We do a certain action or decision because we are waiting for something in return or because we are afraid of punishment. On the other
…show more content…
hand, categorical imperative has a limited command wherein there are no conditions but is considered universal and rational. He also said that the categorical imperative has two kinds of duty. First, the Perfect Duty refers that people do something because they know what is right and wrong and not because they are afraid of other people’s judgment. Second, the Imperfect Duty refers to the things that we desire to do and optional to do. One example of this is when we do charity works. We do charity works not because we are waiting for something in return, but because we just wanted to help. We do it based on our will.
Now, should the good be only characterized by duty and anything else is amoral or immoral?
No, I think that goodness is not ALWAYS duty-bound because I believe that doing duty is based on human reasoning. It is a case-to-case basis. If we know that our duty may affect the maxim that we believed in and may harm other people, then it will also affect our moral obligation to have a peaceful and harmonious life. For example, I believe in the maxim of “Respect and love your parents” and I am one of the subjects of the emperor and he commanded me to kill my parents because they are terrorists. In this situation, my moral obligation overrides my legal obligation as the emperor’s subject. Therefore, I have my own reason not to follow my emperor but to live with the principle that I believed in. In your question of how would I judge people who do not keep their promises, who lies and cheat, and who doesn’t live according to social expectations, I believe that they have their own reason(s) why they do those things. We don’t have the right to judge their action because first of all, their decision is based on their reason. We may not be in their situation, but come to think when we are in their shoes and faced with circumstances they are facing, I think that we would also act according to the same
reason.
That is the main problem of the world today. We tend to judge people’s lives without knowing the real story behind their actions. We must not put our life into the expectations of other people because it limits our will. I believe that there is goodness in humankind and it varies based on human reason. As long as we know what we are doing and as long as we know what should be and what shouldn’t be, we are reasonable. Like what Immanuel Kant said, we must live our life in a categorical imperative way so as to determine what is right and what is wrong thus to live a good life.
hand, categorical imperative has a limited command wherein there are no conditions but is considered universal and rational. He also said that the categorical imperative has two kinds of duty. First, the Perfect Duty refers that people do something because they know what is right and wrong and not because they are afraid of other people’s judgment. Second, the Imperfect Duty refers to the things that we desire to do and optional to do. One example of this is when we do charity works. We do charity works not because we are waiting for something in return, but because we just wanted to help. We do it based on our will.
Now, should the good be only characterized by duty and anything else is amoral or immoral?
No, I think that goodness is not ALWAYS duty-bound because I believe that doing duty is based on human reasoning. It is a case-to-case basis. If we know that our duty may affect the maxim that we believed in and may harm other people, then it will also affect our moral obligation to have a peaceful and harmonious life. For example, I believe in the maxim of “Respect and love your parents” and I am one of the subjects of the emperor and he commanded me to kill my parents because they are terrorists. In this situation, my moral obligation overrides my legal obligation as the emperor’s subject. Therefore, I have my own reason not to follow my emperor but to live with the principle that I believed in. In your question of how would I judge people who do not keep their promises, who lies and cheat, and who doesn’t live according to social expectations, I believe that they have their own reason(s) why they do those things. We don’t have the right to judge their action because first of all, their decision is based on their reason. We may not be in their situation, but come to think when we are in their shoes and faced with circumstances they are facing, I think that we would also act according to the same
reason.
That is the main problem of the world today. We tend to judge people’s lives without knowing the real story behind their actions. We must not put our life into the expectations of other people because it limits our will. I believe that there is goodness in humankind and it varies based on human reason. As long as we know what we are doing and as long as we know what should be and what shouldn’t be, we are reasonable. Like what Immanuel Kant said, we must live our life in a categorical imperative way so as to determine what is right and what is wrong thus to live a good life.