Cited: Shafer-Landau Russ, . The fundamentals of ethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. 322-13. Print.
Cited: Shafer-Landau Russ, . The fundamentals of ethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. 322-13. Print.
References: Boylan, M. (2009). Basic Ethics (2nd ed.). Retrieved from The University of Phoenix eBook Collection database.…
Immanuel Kant’s Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals starts off by saying there is only one thing that is good without qualification which is a good will. Something can only be good if it is well-matched with a good will. In fact, “a good will is” according to him, “is good not because of what it effects or accomplishes, nor because of its fitness to attain some proposed end; it is good only through its willing i.e., it is good in itself” (7). He states that these specific obligations of a good will are called duties and then makes three propositions about them. Kant then says that “I should never act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim…
Immanuel Kant was a German philosopher from the 18th century who is well known as an essential person in philosophy today. He has made the argument that there are a set of essential ideas that structure human experience and is the source of morality. His thought continues to have a major influence in contemporary thought, especially the fields of metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, political philosophy, and aesthetics. Kant’s theory on morality as often been criticized on being too…
Kant’s formulas are then treated as candidates for a universal moral criterion for the permissibility of maxims, to be tested against our intuitions regarding the best cases that inventive philosophers can devise as apparent counterexamples. If one interpretation of Kant’s formula yields counterintuitive results, then another interpretation is proposed. The fate of Kantian ethics itself, as a moral theory, is then seen as depending on this enterprise of interpretation, and how well our best interpretation of Kant’s principle fares against our intuitions about the most challenging examples against which we can test…
This essay aims to argue the views of two different theorist, Jeremy Bentham and Immanuel Kant, with regards to their views on moral worth of an action. The idea of good and bad creates heated debates among many, but this essay will successfully unravel the layers of Bentham’s theory of Utilitarianism and his belief that all our motives are driven by pleasure and pain. While arguing Kant’s opposing argument that moral worth of an act revolves around democratic attitudes, and that moral truths are founded on reasons that is logical to all people. When one breaks down both theories, it occurs that Kant’s theory comes out to be the more sensible one in numerous aspects.…
In this essay I’m going to address questions concerning Kant’s grounding for the metaphysics of morals. First, I will describe each of his examples of acts done out of desire and acts done out of duty. Then I will answer the following questions: 1. What conclusion about moral worth does Kant use these examples to illustrate? 2. Whether I agree or disagree with Kant that if you perform an action out of duty, then the act has more moral worth that it would if you were to perform it out of the desire to make someone else happy—using my own example of a moral act done out of the desire to make someone else happy.…
Emmanuel Kant (hereinafter “Kant”) believes that Ethics is categorical and states that our moral duties are not dependent on feelings but on reason. He further states that our moral duties are unconditional, universally valid, and necessary, regardless of the possible consequences or opposition to our inclinations (Pojman and Vaughn 239).…
Fraud is generally defined as an omission of a material fact or a misrepresentation of the truth, intended for personal gain or to cause loss to another party. The act of fraud is most commonly committed in order to deprive another of money, property, or a legal right. Fraud is considered criminal activity, and anyone who is affected by a fraudulent act has the ability to file a lawsuit to collect damages. J.C. Penny was accused of marking up the prices on their products and then discounting them to the original price in order to trick customers into thinking they were receiving heavy discounts and better deals. J.C. Penny committed this act for their own personal gain, and in doing so, they deprived their customers of money that they would…
Kant philosophy has contributed in development of "pure" moral philosophy, a "metaphysics of morals" that is based on the concepts of reason, not on empirical observations. According to his philosophy moral obligations are applicable to all human beings as it applies not only for particular person in particular situation, but also to all rational beings in all circumstances.…
Immanuel Kant states that the only thing in this world that is “good without qualification” is the good will. He states the attributes of character such as intelligence, wit, and judgment are considered good but can be used for the wrong reasons. Kant also states that the attributes of good fortune such as health, power, riches, honor, that provide one happiness can also be used in the wrong way (7). In order to understand Kant’s view of moral rightness, one must understand that only a good will is unambiguously good without qualification, it is “good in itself”. To clarify, Kant states that “a good will is good not because of what it effects or accomplishes, nor because of its fitness to attain some proposed end; it is good only through its willing, i.e. it is good in itself” (7). To Kant, a good will is the only thing that gives action moral worth. Human beings were granted with reason not only to attain self-preservation and a state of happiness, but “its true function must be to produce a will which is not merely good as a mean to some further end, but it good in itself” (9). Human beings are called to exercise reason through duty to bring a universal good to all. This duty, living according to our highest reason, must be exercised through action that is beneficial and non-contradictory to all. Duty has three major qualifications for Kant. One must recognize that duty is good in itself when an action is performed out of the need of the completion of the duty itself, such as one who abstains from supporting a large restaurant corporation that inhumanely raise cattle or poultry, because he or she recognizes that it is a duty to not perpetuate unethical practice. Or one who carefully recycles their waste not because of the pleasure of being an enlightened “green” individual, but because of the recognition that it is “good in itself” to reuse products. The second…
Imagine a situation where there is a boat full of “good” citizens, and a boat full of “bad” citizens and each boat has a bomb with a detonator in the hands of the other boat. Defining “good” or “bad” is challenging enough, and while analyzing both Kant and Mill one will see that the complexity of the issue cannot be adequately solved by either argument for what one “ought” to do. In the first case, which will be that they are both on the same ship, full of “good” citizens each offers their arguments. Kant argues, “We should not simply destroy individuals simply because our own lives are in danger, for we must do what is good in itself.” Mill, being a utilitarian disagrees with this argument and offers his own argument for what the passengers ought to do. He begins, “We ought to pursue the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, and since we do seek happiness as an end in itself. Being upstanding citizens, we are more valuable to society and can produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number if we push the detonator and go home.” Although there are respectable points in each argument, one can determine that neither argument is sufficient for solving the puzzle because there is no winning.…
In his publication, Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant supplies his readers with a thesis that claims morality can be derived from the principle of the categorical imperative. The strongest argument to support his thesis is the difference between actions in accordance with duty and actions in accordance from duty. To setup his thesis, Kant first draws a distinction between empirical and "a priori" concepts. Empirical concepts are ideas we reach from our experiences in the world. On the other hand and in contrast, "a priori" concepts are ideas we reach as an end point of reasoning prior to or apart from any experience of how things occur in the world. Kant then claims that moral actions are supposed done for the reason of morality alone. This train of thought leads to the conclusion that an understanding of morality must be based on "a priori" concepts of reason. Truly moral ideas are then universally valid if and only if they are based on "a priori" concepts.…
When we talk about whether or not a person is ethically right, we can look at the actions that he or she may partake in. These actions maybe studied in different situations such as the one that we were told to evaluate. While leaving the grocery store, one witnesses an old man struggling with his oxygen tank. Without thinking, you lift the tank and help the elderly man. This action is a kind gesture, but would we consider this a moral act? One could analyze this situation with two different ethical theories, by Kantian and/or Aristotelian views.…
In ethics many theories have similar and different ideas among them. Two theories that share this are utilitarianism and Kant’s moral theory. Both theories have similar ideas but they also are perceived differently.…
Immanuel Kant created a handful of formulations regarding his system of determining morality, the Categorical Imperative. James and Stuart Rachels in The Elements of Moral Philosophy, illuminate Kant's first and second Categorical Imperatives. While Kant claims the formulations are equivalent, they offer differing guidelines on how the Categorical Imperative is operated. Although the formulations share the same basis, the difference regarding how the formulations are adhered, is a large distinction difficult to ignore, and renders the two versions as separate subjects.…