This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.
The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten, 1785) is Immanuel Kant's first contribution to moral philosophy, written in order to establish the a priori fundamental basis for morality. Where the Critique of Pure Reason laid out his metaphysical and epistemological ideas, this relatively short work was meant to outline and define the concepts and arguments that he planned to write about more in the years to come. Thus, the book is broken into Kant's preface, followed by three sections. He first works from common reason up to the supreme unconditional law, in order to identify its existence. He then works backwards from there to prove the relevance and weight of the moral law. Notably, Kant waits to mention the now famous Categorical Imperative explicitly until the second section, despite making allusions to it earlier. The third and final section of the book is famously obscure, and it is partly because of this that Kant later, in 1788, decides to publish the Critique of Practical Reason. Image File history File links Circle-question. ...
Image File history File links Information_icon. ...
1785 was a common year starting on Saturday (see link for calendar). ...
Immanuel Kant (22 April 1724 – 12 February 1804), was a German philosopher from Königsberg in East Prussia (now Kaliningrad, Russia). ...
The terms a priori and a posteriori are used in philosophy to distinguish between two different types of propositional knowledge. ...
Morality refers to the concept of human ethics which pertains to matters of good and evil —also referred to as right or wrong, used within three contexts: individual conscience; systems of principles and judgments — sometimes called moral values —shared within a cultural, religious, secular, Humanist, or philosophical community; and codes...
This article or section is incomplete and may require cleanup and/or expansion. ...
cover of 1898 English edition of the Critique of Practical Reason The Critique of Practical Reason (Kritik der praktischen Vernunft) is the second of Immanuel Kants three critiques, first published in 1788. ...
The Categorical Imperative
-
The above non-contradiction test is also called the Categorical Imperative test, and is the centerpiece of the Groundwork. Although it may seem superficially similar to the Golden Rule, it is no way equivalent to it. The Golden Rule demands that one's actions conform to one's own standard, whereas Kant's moral imperative places the standard for moral good elsewhere. Thus, there are certain ways people can and cannot be treated, no matter how one feels about it. Even if a person were to loathe him or herself and think others can, and perhaps should treat that person poorly, one is not justified in treating others poorly. The categorical imperative is the central philosophical concept of the moral philosophy of Immanuel Kant, and to modern deontological ethics. ...
The term Golden Rule may refer to any of the following Wikipedia articles: The Golden Rule - in ethics, religion and philosophy. ...
A moral imperative is an ethical responsibility. ...
Consider the example of the liar: what does the Golden Rule say about lying to others. It would be acceptable under some situations, yet the Categorical Imperative determines lying immoral without exception. This demonstrates a deep flaw in the Golden Rule; one corrected by insisting that actions must be universalizable to be moral, and by insisting that morality cannot be merely a matter of preference or taste.
Kant expanded and elucidated these ideas further in some of his later works, primarily the Critique of Practical Reason (1788) – informally referred to as his Second Critique, Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone (1793), and the Metaphysics of Morals (1797). cover of 1898 English edition of the Critique of Practical Reason The Critique of Practical Reason (Kritik der praktischen Vernunft) is the second of Immanuel Kants three critiques, first published in 1788. ...
1788 was a leap year starting on Tuesday (see link for calendar). ...
1793 was a common year starting on Tuesday (see link for calendar). ...
The Metaphysics of Morals (Die Metaphysik der Sitten, 1797) is a major work of moral philosophy by Immanuel Kant. ...
1797 (MDCCXCVII) was a common year starting on Sunday (see link for calendar) of the Gregorian calendar (or a common year starting on Wednesday of the 11-day-slower Julian calendar). ...
Maxims -
In establishing the a priori, rational basis for morality, Kant uses the notion of a maxim: a formulation of the subjective principle of volition, or in other words, a rule followed in any deliberately intentional act. Actions that have moral worth are determined to fall into one of the five formulations of the Categorical Imperative. Each one describes the universal law of morality somewhat differently, but they are merely intended to demonstrate different aspects of the one supreme and universal law. According to Immanuel Kant, a maxim is a subjective principle or rule, that the will of an individual uses in making a decision. ...
Volition is the study of will, choice, and decision. ...
However, a maxim has no moral worth if, (1) it cannot be universalized without contradicting its own end, (2) if the subjective content of the maxim is such that it treats the humanity in oneself or others as a vehicle towards one's end, or (3), if the subjective content of the maxim is inconsistent with the will making one's rational autonomy an object of respect. Humanity refers to the human race or mankind as a whole, to that which is characteristically human, or to that which distinguishes human beings from other animals or from other animal species primal nature. ...
Look up autonomy, autonomous in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. ...
It is important to note that in Kant's Groundwork, he is concerned with offering explanation about the purely formal (negative or limiting) aspects of his moral philosophy. Thus, actions either have moral worth, or they do not; at the time he was writing, it was most important to establish what actions were morally unlawful - that is, what we ought not to do - before moving deeper into his theory.
Examples, From the Abstract to the Concrete Kant uses the same four examples throughout the Groundwork: 1) that of someone sick of life, contemplating suicide, 2) that of someone wanting to tell a lying promise so as to secure a loan (one he does not intend to repay), 3) that of someone inclined to waste some special talent she has, and 4) that one might be devoid of altruistic feeling. Moreover, in 'On A Supposed Right to Lie because of Philanthropic Concerns,' we get an example that argues for an absolute prohibition against lying -- even if it is likely to lead to another's death. We may adapt and modify some of his examples below.
Lying Is lying immoral? Let us determine if this behavior is immoral, according to Kant's contradiction test: If the behavior leads to a contradiction (is internally incoherent or cannot be willed by an agent) then the behavior is immoral.
Lies only work in an overall environment of truthfulness. One still wants everyone else to tell the truth, since if everyone else were to lie then no one would believe anything anyone said, and lies would no longer be effective. Thus, we cannot will that our subjective maxim of lying be universalized without self-contradiction; if everyone were to do it then the behavior would not work. Thus, in this system lying is immoral. Good intentions must be practiced to pursue a general end of happiness.
Proof of the Moral Law To follow Enlightenment style, Kant must begin by proving that morality exists. He does quickly, simply stating, “That there must be such a philosophy is already obvious from the common Idea of duty and from the laws of morality.” [1] In other words, a universal moral law must exist because we universally imagine a universal moral law to exist; we would not all agree it exists if there were not a moral law within us that we are observing.
Common Sense of Duty Kant explains that nothing "can be taken as good without qualification, except a good will." [2] A good will is the moral compass that always seeks good; even if a person fails, it is not the fault of the good will but of his/her ability to carry it out.
In chapter one, Kant explains what is commonly meant by moral obligations and duty. It is fairly common sense, he says, that when an act is done out of inclination to yourself, it is not considered moral. For example, a shopkeeper with honest prices does so foremost to be respected by his customers, not for the sake of honesty. That person "deserves praise and encouragement, but not esteem." [3] It is common knowledge that the people for whom there is no reward are acting the most morally. Kant expands this to say they are the only people acting morally. We esteem a person who gives up his life because he gains nothing. "Duty is the necessity to act out of reverence for the [moral] law." [4] Following the moral law, the intrinsic sense of right and wrong, is the greatest obligation.
Common sense also has told us the value of the Golden Rule, to treat others as we wish to be treated. It is desirable to evaluate our actions in light of those whom we are affecting. The term Golden Rule may refer to any of the following Wikipedia articles: The Golden Rule - in ethics, religion and philosophy. ...
Kant's Argument: Autonomy and Freedom Why should we want to act morally, that is, why should we will in a rationally consistent manner? Why can't I make an exception of my self and for my case? Kant's arguments stem from the concept of freedom. Kant argues that the very idea of morality, the limiting of yourself from engaging in certain behaviors because they are 'immoral', is the highest expression of the concept of freedom. - The only thing good without qualification is the good will; a good will is free and autonomous.
Freedom, at least, means freedom from being influenced by outside forces, influences external to a person and their mind. For example, if a person is influenced by want of an object, or fame or revenge, or for any other reason, then Kant would say that they are not free; they are beholden (enslaved) to these outside influences. The state of being beholden to these outside influences Kant labelled as heteronomy. But freedom, for Kant, also means adhering to the moral law -- having one's will determined not, as above, externally, but only by its own nature. The state of being free is the state of one's will being autonomous, literally, in the state of "giving the law to oneself." // will power redirects here. ...
This is contrasted with:
- Heteronomy is the state of being beholden to external influences.
If one wishes to be autonomous then one must not be compelled to act by external influences but instead be governed by one's own mind and rational thoughts. One such logical principle is the law of non-contradiction. P and not P (P and ~P) cannot exist simultaneously. For example, the snow is either white or not white, it cannot be both white and not white at the same time. In logic, the law of noncontradiction judges as false any proposition P asserting that both proposition Q and its denial, proposition not-Q, are true at the same time and in the same respect. In the words of Aristotle, One cannot say of something that it is and that it...
- To act rationally is to abide (at least) by the law of non-contradiction, here, not willing that something be both true and false simultaneously.
Thus if a person engages in any behavior that is not governed by rational thought (i.e. is being irrational) then they are being influenced by external forces and are then beholden to these external forces (again like wants for objects, desires). Immorality, then, is simply and deeply irrationality! Not being free is to have abandoned one's rational faculties. If, by contrast, the behavior is governed by rational thought, and thus not contradictory, then that behavior is permissible. In logic, the law of noncontradiction judges as false any proposition P asserting that both proposition Q and its denial, proposition not-Q, are true at the same time and in the same respect. In the words of Aristotle, One cannot say of something that it is and that it...
Not all external forces are external to the person, however. Inclinations such as greed or anger can be a part of a person, but are still external to the will. This is a clear example where Kant's view of freedom differs from the opposing view of the freedom to do what one wants. When consumed by anger, people want to do certain things. But once the haze clears up, they realize that they did something morally wrong (such as hurting another person). They were driven by factors external to their will. Inclinations, then, enslave us at times, and Kant's theory of freedom is one of the few that take this into account.
Ends Not Means Throughout his work Kant does not encourage acting in to attain happiness or any supreme state of pleasure. That action is also the source of all sorts of evil, so it cannot be both good and evil. "They can also be extremely bad and hurtful . . . power, wealth, honour, even health and that complete well-being and contentment with one’s state which goes by the name of ‘happiness.’" (p 61, emphasis his) The categorical imperative demands that we work for the universal good without any regard for our own happiness.
In the same way, our actions towards others should be irrelevant of our own happiness. "[E]very rational being, exists as an end in himself, not merely as a means for arbitrary use." [5] By nature of being rational deserves what Kant calls an end, "a subjective ground of its self-determination.” [6] In simple words, when we ignore ourselves and think of the good of another, we will treat them well.
Critical Reaction In his book On the Basis of Morality (1840), Arthur Schopenhauer presented a careful analysis of the Groundwork. Schopenhauer's criticism of Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals is an attempt to prove, among other things, that actions are not moral when they are performed solely from duty. Schopenhauer specifically targeted the Categorical Imperative, and labeled it cold and egoistic. While Schopenhauer publically called himself a Kantian, and made clear and bold criticisms of Hegelian philosophy, he was quick and unrelenting in his analysis of Kant's inconsistencies throughout his long body of work. 1840 is a leap year starting on Wednesday (link will take you to calendar). ...
Arthur Schopenhauer (February 22, 1788 – September 21, 1860, [1] IPA: ) was a German philosopher, often considered a pessimist. ...
To meet Wikipedias quality standards, this article or section may require cleanup. ...
In moral philosophy, deontology is the view that morality either forbids or permits actions, which is done through moral norms. ...
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (August 27, 1770 - November 14, 1831) was a German philosopher born in Stuttgart, Württemberg, in present-day southwest Germany. ...
References - ^ Kant, Immanuel, The Moral Law, trans., ed. H. J. Paton (London: Hutchinson & Co. Ltd., 1964), p. 57.
- ^ The Moral Law, p. 61.
- ^ The Moral Law, p. 66.
- ^ The Moral Law, p. 68.
- ^ The Moral Law, p. 95.
- ^ The Moral Law, p. 95.
External links |
Feeds |
Contact