Kantian Ethics

• Kantian ethics

  • deontological ethical theory, intentions are more important than consequences
  • in opposition to utilitarianism/consequentialism
  • focused solely on the intentions of actions
  • to live a moral life we must follow our duties to one another
• Arguments for deontology

  • ethics must be a matter of what you can control
  • you can control intentions but not consequences
  • ’ought implies can’ - Kant
  • must be plausible to do
• Arguments for consequentialism

  • what you foresee not what is intended, matters
  • dresden bombings and the ethical implications alongside it
  • intentions weren’t to kill civilians but many were killed
• Desires and rational desires (the will)

  • rational desires are what we want to want
  • these are in opposition to immediate desires
  • rational desires are what moral decision making should be based on
  • ie, I want to eat cake (immediate desire) but I’m on a diet so I will not (rational desire)
• Any action not undertaken freely has no moral worth

  • actions only considered morally good if they are taken freely by a good will
  • all moral good comes from good will which is doing the right thing for the right reasons
  • the will we have to make rational decisions must be a good one
• Objection to Kants Ethics

  • Kants idea of good will is empty and doesn’t give a sound definition
  • kind of circular
  • kant is vague about what he means by good will
• Acting out of duty

  Morally good acts because you are acting out of a sense of duty and a moral obligation to rules
• Acting in accordance with duty

  • doing something good for ulterior, self interested motives
  • both result in the same outcome but only acting out of duty carries moral weight
• Differences to utilitarianism

  • Kant takes human beings to be intrinsic valuable
  • Utilitarianism takes human beings as instrumentally valuable
  • ie human beings that create no utility have no value
• Using someone as a means

  • using someone to achieve an end that doesn’t disregard one’s autonomy
• Using someone as a mere means

  • using someone to achieve an end that disregards one’s autonomy
• Categorical Imperatives

  It doesn't matter what you want, you must do x

  • without exception, absolute and unconditional
  • Kant believed that moral imperatives are categorical imperatives
  • when a maxim leads to a duty that we should do (ie helping those in trouble) it is called a categorical imperative
• Hypothetical Imperatives

  If you want x, then you ought to do y

  • Kant identified hidden goals in our moral reasoning as a way of justifying our end goals
  • for example 'if I want to lose weight I need to start a diet' Kant would argue that these are not universalisable as only a proportion of the population is overweight
  • Hypothetical imperatives are goals we set ourselves to reach an end goal
  • Different from categorical as in categorical there is no end goal
• Perfect duties

  Conceive a maxim ie 'Steal something that will help you reach a goal'

  • can a world be conceived where everybody follows that maxim? NO
  • If a maxim cannot be conceived then it creates a contradiction in conception
  • This means one has a perfect duty not to carry out this action
• Perfect Duty

  An action that morally must never be performed, they are immoral and do not stem from good will. Contains absolute moral blame.
• Contradiction in Conception

  A world not conceivable in any way as they are contrary to how we would want the world to be
• Imperfect Duties

  Imperfect duties stem from a contradiction in the will

  conceive a maxim - ie 'i do nothing to help others when i am tired'

  • Is it conceivable? Yes
  • can we rationally will that people follow this maxim? No

  If there is no contradiction in conception but a contradiction in the will then it generates an imperfect duty to others.
• Imperfect Duty

  Derived from a contradiction in the will and generates some moral blame, but not absolute.
• Suicide - a perfect duty to ourselves

  Kant summarises the maxim to be ' i will end my life if I am suffering more pain than pleasure, out of self-love. '

  • Such a maxim creates a contradiction in the will and henceforth a perfect duty
  • If universalised there would be no one left on the planet
• Laziness - an imperfect duty to ourselves

  Kant creates the maxim ' I will not develop my talents to keep myself comfortable

  • Such a world is conceivable but cannot be rationally willed, creating an imperfect duty
• The first formulation of the categorical imperative: the universalizability formulation

  'Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can simultaneously will that it will become universal law'

  • act only on moral rules where you can at the same time rationally desire (will) that you live in a moral world where everyone does that moral rule
  • Morality must hold everyone to the same standard - I cannot rationally will that make an exception for myself
  • Kant says we could never rationally will that we live in a world in which immoral behaviour is universally accepted
• The second formulation of the categorical imperative: the humanity formulation

  'Act in a way that you treat humanity whether in your own person or in the person of any other never merely as a means but always at the same time as an end'

  • Kant insists that we see people as ends in themselves and never as a means to an end
  • Treat everybody as they are valuable for theur own sake and not just something that can be used to achieve some other goal
  • Shopkeeper (means to an end, mutually beneficial) Slavery (mere means to an end)
• Strengths of Kantian Ethics

  • It doesn't permit using people as mere means to an end if such an action would bring about greater happiness for more people
  • Explains the origins of human rights and why they can't be violated
  • Categorical imperative provides clear instructions for working out moral behaviour
  • Egalitarian theory - every rational human is an end in themselves
• Kantian Ethics answers 3 questions

  How do i know what's moral?

  • Kant says via reason

  What is the foundation for moral facts?

  • Kant says reason grounds it

  Why should i be moral?

  • Kant says it is irrational to be moral
• Issues with Kantian Ethics

  • clashing/competing duties
  • Issues with universalising maxims
  • Does Kantian ethics ignore consequences?
  • Value of other Motives
  • Life is a series of hypothetical imperatives
• Clashing/Competing duties

  In some situations it is unclear which duty takes precedence

  • Jean-Paul Sartre
  • During war occupation, a man cares for his mother who lost her other children in the war
  • The young man is inspired by fellow resistance fighters and feels he has a duty to his country to join the resistance and push back against occupiers
  • Does he owe his duties to his mother or country?
• Clashing/Competing duties - possible Kantian responses

  • Could use the formulation of the categorical imperative to create a more specific maxim for specific situations
  • Eg 'When a murderous axeman is looking for my friend one ought to lie'
  • may be able to rationally will that everyone would lie to the axe murderer
• Issues with universalizing maxims (1)

  Can't universalise positive maxims

  • ie 'i will always wear a hat in cold weather'
  • Can be universalised but not moral
  • wouldn't make the world a better place
  • Maxims that can't universalized are the ones we shouldn't do - which means there is no positive guide for action, only for things we shouldn't do
• Issues with universalizing maxims (2)

  Some non-universalisable maxims are morally okay

  • similarly not all non-universalizable maxims are immoral, ie ' will get a grade in the top 50% of all marks'
  • rational and reasonable
  • not universalizable as its logically and mathematically impossible
• Issues with universalising maxims - possible replies

  Response to 'Can't universalise positive maxims'

  • Kant: Moral conduct is derived from considerations about rational conduct
  • Practical and moral Conduct are in the same domain for Kant

  Response to 'Some non-universalizable maxims are morally okay'

  • Mess with the working
  • 'one ought to achieve a grade in the top 50% of overall marks'
• The moral value of consequences

  • Utilitarianism forces us to look at the consequences of our actions, arguably a natural human faculty
  • Kantian ethics doesnt allow us to do this
  • Axeman example, cannot universalise a world of telling lies nor can we use the axe man as a mere means to an end by lying to him, saving the friend
• The moral value of consequences - possible responses

  • consequences can be good or bad but only intentions can be morally good or bad
  • Ethics must be a matter of what can be controlled and we can only control intentions
• The value of other motives

  Father who spends quality time with his child because he believes it means his son loves him.

  • Father is acting in accordance with duty not out of it
  • Not morally praiseworthy
  • For the father to be truly moral, he must spend time with the child because it is the right thing to do, with no feelings about it at all
  • Counterintuitive with how we live as humans
• Value of other motives (2)

  Philosopher Bernard Williams

  • Argued the mistake in kants thinking that we are rational beings but that not all we are
  • We have desires to care for people that go beyond the rational
  • Kants thinking is useful for factual considerations but in practical ethics it strips us of things that make us human in the first place
• Value of other motives (3)

  Feminist Philosopher Carol Gilligan

  • Criticised Kants thinking as a specifically male way of seeing the world
  • Women are often caregivers in society and she argued that women and girls exhibit distinct moral development based on feelings of care and responsibility of others
• Value of other motives - possible responses

  • Aristotle taught that we ought to cultivate virtue within ourselves, including compassion
  • One can choose their feelings if one works on their virtuous character over time
  • One can gain control over their emotions through repeated practice of moral virtues
• Life is a System of hypothetical imperatives

  Philippa Foot

  • short term goals ( hypothetical imperatives) motivate us to move onto better things
  • No moral weight behind perfect duties such as 'do not lie' - Kant is assuming a priori that lying is bad without explaining why it shouldn't be done
  • Hypothetical imperatives do carry moral weight as they give us a clear goal to aim for
  • wanting to be rich, successful or with a large family are all imperfect duties to Kant but what is ethically wrong with this?
• Life is a system of hypothetical imperatives - possible responses (1)

  'No moral weight behind some perfect duties' Kant assumes a priori that lying is bad without telling why we shouldn't do it

  • Kant isn't assuming they're bad, he is demonstrating that they're bad by showing that we could not rationally will that everyone will carry them out
• Life is a series of hypothetical imperatives - possible responses (2)

  'Life is a series of hypothetical imperatives' Being rich, successful, and wanting a big family are all imperfect duties but seem morally ok

  • Formulate the maxim in a more specific way ie 'one ought to aim to live a life that brings them maximum satisfaction provided it brings no harm to others
• Sometimes we should violate the humanity formula

  • a police officer uses their gun to force a terrorist to shut off their bomb, using the terrorist as a mere means to an end here, but it has to be morally right because more innocent lives are saved

  Too flexible with maxims and Kantian ethics becomes consequentialist

  • formulate maxim so specifically that it only applies so such a specific situation then it essentially becomes consequentialism if one time maxims are being used so frequently