Kant's Deontological Theories

• Briefly summarise in points Kant's deontological ethics

  • the only thing thats good without qualification is good will
  • Good will means acting for the sake of duty
  • You have a duty to follow the moral law
  • Moral laws are universal
  • You can tell a maxim is universal if it passes the categorical imperative

  The categorical imperative two tests:

  • contradiction in conception
  • contradiction in will

  
  

  • Do not treat humans as means to an end ( the humanity formula)
• Meaning of The Good Will


  Acting for the sake of duty, for example if you save someones life because you recognise you have a duty to do it, then that is of moral worth. Not if you save someones life expecting to be rewarded
• What is the categorical imperative

  Categorical imperative is the moral law, and gives two ways to test whether a maxim passes the categorical imperative: contradiction in conception and contradiction in will, the third formula for categorical imperative is humanity formula
• Test 1: Contradiction in conception


  • For a law to be universal, it musn't be contradictory.
  • Apply a maxim like "you should steal" to this test, but it would fail because it would lead to everyone just stealing then the point of ownership would be non applicable anymore and stealing wouldn't be possible because property would be for everyone
• Test 2: Contradiction in Will


  • If there is no contradiction in conception, we have to ask whether the maxim results in contradiction in will (can we rationally will the maxim)
  • e.g: can we rationally will "not to help others in need"?
  • There is no contradiction in conception in a world where nobody helps anybody, but we cannot rationally will this because we have goals (ends) that cannot be achieved without the help of others.

  To will the ends, we must will the means
• Test 3 : Humanity Formula


  • Kant says that we should never treat people as means to an end.
  • e.g dont marry someone just to take their money then divorce them.

  By deceiving them, you undermine the rational agency of the other party and achieving their own ends (i.e finding a loving partner)
• Problem #1 for K.E: Not all universal maxims are moral (vice versa)

  • we can easily tweak a maxim slightly to avoid C.I.C and justify stealing
  • For example "to steal" can change to "to steal from people with 9 letters in their name"
  • This maxim can be universalised without diminishing the concept of private property.
  • For Kant, if a maxim can be universalised, it is morally acceptable.
• Possible response for Problem #1

  • Adding extra conditions would be considered cheating because of the extra conditions as these are morally irrelevant to the situation.

  Categorical imperative is concerned with the actual maxim being acted on, not an arbitrary one
• Problem #2 for K.E: Ignores Consequences

  • Kant's ethics completely disregards consequences unlike utilitarianism.
  • If you were to ask Kant, is stealing okay even in some circumstances like your family is starving to death, Kant would say no and say we have a perfect duty not to steal. Kant's ethics is too rigid to applicable to society
• Problem #3 for K.E : Ignores other valuable motivations

  • Kant says acting out of duty has moral worth
  • But if we wanted to go visit a friend in the hospital out of love, that does not have moral worth.
  • Rather if i instead went because I know i have to (even if i dont want to) that has more moral worth.
• Possible response to Ignores other valuable motivation

  • Kant would respond by making a distinction between acting for the sake of duty and acting in accordance with duty
  • We should always act out of duty but acting in accordance with duty is also a bonus
• Problem #4 for K.E : Conflicts between duties

  • Kant argues its never okay to violate our duties.
  • But what if a situation comes where we are forced to violate a duty e.g Kant says "to never lie", and a perfect duty to "never break promises"?
  • What if you find yourself in a situation where the only way to keep the promise is by telling a lie
• Possible response to : Conflicts between duties

  Kant would say that if there is conflict between two of your duties, you clearly have formulated them wrong as this would cause contradiction in conception, making it non universal
• Problem #5: Foot - Morality as a system of hypothetical imperatives

  • Morality isn't categorical, it's hypothetical
  • Following hypothetical imperatives is less arbitrary as it provides a reason for why we shouldn't do a certain action
  • Instead, it should be "you shouldn't steal if you don't want to upset the person you're stealing from"
• Summarisation of Kant's Deontological Ethics

  • Kant believes the Good Will is acting for sake of duty
  • You have a duty to follow moral law
  • Categorical Imperatives : three tests
  • Not all universal maxims are moral
  • Ignores consequences
  • Other valuable motivations
  • conflicts between duties
  • Foot: hypothetical imperative
• What two kinds of maxims (rules) are there

  • Hypothetical
  • Categorical
• What is a categorical rule

  • Categorical rules are not qualified by "if" statement, they apply universally
  • e.g "you shouldn't steal" applies to everyone
• What is hypothetical rules

  • qualified by an "if" statement
  • e.g "you should do your homework if you want to do well in the exam"