KANTIAN ETHICS
Introduction
Introductory Lines
Since the fifth century BCE, humanity has attempted to formulate moral principles that govern
one’s behaviour, so that individuals can uphold important values and ideologies as well as function
with others in a flourishing society.
Questions
However, this raises questions regarding the framework upon which ethics should be based. Should
morality be focused on a sense of duty? Or the consequences that an action causes? Is it ever
justified to perform a ‘bad’ action if it would produce a ‘good’ consequence?
Debate
These perspectives refer to the intellectual debate of normative ethics, in which it is explored how
one ought to act when faced with ethical dilemmas.
Philosophy
A philosophical theory that relates to this issue is deontology, which states that the morality of an
action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules and
principles.
It advocates that the notions of duty and intention are the most important aspects when
determining the morality of an action.
Philosopher
A proponent of this philosophical theory is Immanuel Kant, who formulates his ethical framework
based upon duty and the categorical imperative.
Societal Implications
In terms of societal implications, the debate of normative ethics is of substantial importance when
agents are faced with morally difficult decisions.
Should one focus on what consequence would bring about the most happiness, or what they have
an obligation to do?
This debate is also important in terms of crime and punishment.
It could be argued that penalisation for deterrence, separation and rehabilitation maximise pleasure
from a utilitarian’s perspective, whilst the punishment system of retribution penalises those based
on the idea that they are responsible for their actions.
This adheres to Kant’s idea that ‘every deed violating a human beings right deserves punishment,
the function of which being to avenge a crime on the one who committed it’.
Evaluation
This essay will critically evaluate Kantian ethics, finding that whilst the theory is thorough and well-
founded, Kant’s absolutist stance on ethics has deemed his theory redundant and impractical.
Despite this, his focus on duty can be considered a valid basis of morality if given some indication
and flexibility of what duties are more important than others. However, overall Kant is not able to
justify a moral act to be one that originates from a sense of duty.
Kantian Ethics
Kant and General Theory
Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804) was a German philosopher who sought to establish a supreme
principle of morality.
He was a rationalist who believed that we could gain knowledge from our senses and through our
rational capacities.
This means that his general philosophical approach was based upon what we can know ‘a priori’.
He starts from the notion of duty, advocating the deontological theory that moral actions are solely
determined by the intentions and obligations that a moral agent possesses.
Perfect and Imperfect Duties
Kant also makes a distinction between perfect and imperfect duties.
Perfect duties are proscriptions of specific kinds of actions and violating them is morally
blameworthy.
Introduction
Introductory Lines
Since the fifth century BCE, humanity has attempted to formulate moral principles that govern
one’s behaviour, so that individuals can uphold important values and ideologies as well as function
with others in a flourishing society.
Questions
However, this raises questions regarding the framework upon which ethics should be based. Should
morality be focused on a sense of duty? Or the consequences that an action causes? Is it ever
justified to perform a ‘bad’ action if it would produce a ‘good’ consequence?
Debate
These perspectives refer to the intellectual debate of normative ethics, in which it is explored how
one ought to act when faced with ethical dilemmas.
Philosophy
A philosophical theory that relates to this issue is deontology, which states that the morality of an
action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules and
principles.
It advocates that the notions of duty and intention are the most important aspects when
determining the morality of an action.
Philosopher
A proponent of this philosophical theory is Immanuel Kant, who formulates his ethical framework
based upon duty and the categorical imperative.
Societal Implications
In terms of societal implications, the debate of normative ethics is of substantial importance when
agents are faced with morally difficult decisions.
Should one focus on what consequence would bring about the most happiness, or what they have
an obligation to do?
This debate is also important in terms of crime and punishment.
It could be argued that penalisation for deterrence, separation and rehabilitation maximise pleasure
from a utilitarian’s perspective, whilst the punishment system of retribution penalises those based
on the idea that they are responsible for their actions.
This adheres to Kant’s idea that ‘every deed violating a human beings right deserves punishment,
the function of which being to avenge a crime on the one who committed it’.
Evaluation
This essay will critically evaluate Kantian ethics, finding that whilst the theory is thorough and well-
founded, Kant’s absolutist stance on ethics has deemed his theory redundant and impractical.
Despite this, his focus on duty can be considered a valid basis of morality if given some indication
and flexibility of what duties are more important than others. However, overall Kant is not able to
justify a moral act to be one that originates from a sense of duty.
Kantian Ethics
Kant and General Theory
Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804) was a German philosopher who sought to establish a supreme
principle of morality.
He was a rationalist who believed that we could gain knowledge from our senses and through our
rational capacities.
This means that his general philosophical approach was based upon what we can know ‘a priori’.
He starts from the notion of duty, advocating the deontological theory that moral actions are solely
determined by the intentions and obligations that a moral agent possesses.
Perfect and Imperfect Duties
Kant also makes a distinction between perfect and imperfect duties.
Perfect duties are proscriptions of specific kinds of actions and violating them is morally
blameworthy.
