Immanuel Kant Deontology Essay
Immanuel Kant, in his deontology ethics, believes that morality relates to the matter of duty and people have the moral duties to do what is the right and not to do what is wrong. He focuses his theory on good will, duty and categorical imperatives as the basis for the principle of morality. Therefore, this essay will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of Kant’s deontology with regard to his arguments on good will, duty and categorical imperatives.
GOOD WILL
Initially, Kant points out the idea of “good will” in his moral analysis and he uses it as a base for the principle on ordinary moral judgement. Kant claims that „nothing can possibly conceived in the world, or even out of it, which can be called good without qualification, except a …show more content…
(Johnson & Cureton, 2017) argue that they do not think the action performed with duty is better than the actions performed with emotions to others, especially to their relatives such as family. Furthermore Johnson & Cureton claim that the moral worth is perhaps not only from the action motivated by duty but also the other motives, including love or friendship. Other weakness is that Kant states duty is a priori for the action, however, some critics provide the example in the medical ethics where the experience is actually the major element in judging whether the action is morally right or wrong (RSRevision , 2017). Thirdly, Kant’s argument on duty seems problematic when there is clash between different duties in a situation (Simmons, 2015). The reason is that, what should we do if we tell lie to not hurt a person or if we hurt a person by telling the true. It is obvious that “Do not tell lie!” and “Do not hurt others!” are the two duties that are morally corrected and must be followed by people in Kant’s theory. As a result, which action should people take when the duties are absolute and people must follow these duties. Kant seems to provide no answer for this kind of
GOOD WILL
Initially, Kant points out the idea of “good will” in his moral analysis and he uses it as a base for the principle on ordinary moral judgement. Kant claims that „nothing can possibly conceived in the world, or even out of it, which can be called good without qualification, except a …show more content…
(Johnson & Cureton, 2017) argue that they do not think the action performed with duty is better than the actions performed with emotions to others, especially to their relatives such as family. Furthermore Johnson & Cureton claim that the moral worth is perhaps not only from the action motivated by duty but also the other motives, including love or friendship. Other weakness is that Kant states duty is a priori for the action, however, some critics provide the example in the medical ethics where the experience is actually the major element in judging whether the action is morally right or wrong (RSRevision , 2017). Thirdly, Kant’s argument on duty seems problematic when there is clash between different duties in a situation (Simmons, 2015). The reason is that, what should we do if we tell lie to not hurt a person or if we hurt a person by telling the true. It is obvious that “Do not tell lie!” and “Do not hurt others!” are the two duties that are morally corrected and must be followed by people in Kant’s theory. As a result, which action should people take when the duties are absolute and people must follow these duties. Kant seems to provide no answer for this kind of