Kantian Ethics Essay

Immanuel Kants clean-living system has become the heart of deontological ethics. It differentiates itself by looking at morality as an extension of mans reason. Unlike a nonher(prenominal) honourable theories, the individual is seen as the primary roleplayor of wholly moral decisions. His autonomy, his provide is seen as the locust of ethical judgment. For Kant in order for an act to be considered morally worthy it has to be done out of duty. From my understanding of Kant, when we talk of duty it is something which our reason recognizes as a manifestation of a universal law, one which he/she cannot deny.Doing the right thing is not about whether or not the terminus might be gauged to be positive, or that because an individual feels that he/she moldiness perform a extra act rather she knows that it is his/her duty. In order to be ethically praiseworthy, the mortal must ask himself, Am I the one who is deciding and acting? The morality of Kant builds on the want of the philo sopher to describe and order an ethical life that is centered on the rational faculty of man, his reason.It is the case that in a lot of cases mint tend to look at the possible consequences of an action in judging whether or not what theyre about to do is moral or not. At times we act out of good intentions, dowery others, sharing, et al. because we feel that its the good thing to do. Unfortunately, Kant wont agree with our ways. In fact, he would eve say that such actions rich soulfulness no moral worth. For Kant, the important thing is our obligation to do something, feelings, intentions, and consequences may gain the approval of others but they are too whimsical.There is for him an a priori (before reason) law which tells us what ought to be done. As rational universes we are dignified with our ability to discern this law, much more, we are capable of make it (Kremling, n. d. ). To act contrary to what our reason dictates, is choosing to act in heteronomy, a big no-no for Immanuel Kant because it belittles the individual, the latter produces as a result, acts that are empty. If Kantian Morality sounds a bit of feel-good emotions, intentions, and happy thoughts, then I estimate were on the right track.Ethics in terms of Kant is not about making another person smile its not about calculating how many people you could help out by doing something. At the end of the day, acting on such things are all half-chances, there is no cover that by helping someone out would be good, theres no assurance that if you think of the number of people who would benefit, it means you wont harm others. Autonomy plays a central social occasion in the moral theory of Kant, in such a way that a man must in his own volition choose to legislate a universal law and act in accordance to it.How does one determine which acts are in accordance with good pass on per se and is therefore uninversalizable? For Kant all actions can be tell apartd as a maxim, a person as an self-go verning person creates the maxim but at the same time has to make sure that it is a doctrine that every rational being can agree to with no exceptions. This is the categorical imperative, contrary to the hypothetical imperative which is stated as an If-then. I. e. If I want to pass this class then I have to canvas the Categorical Imperative claims a universal statement that is true at all times (.When a person acts out of duty the latter is presumed to have passed the categorical maxim put forward to state the action In laymans terms we could state the maxim as a headway first, i. e. can I will to cheat on an exam, in such a way that others would as a whole can will to do so? There are categorical imperatives that have been formulated by Kant as the most basic of ethical requirements, like for example, Lying is an act that for him will never become morally justifiable, we must always follow the imperative to never use a person but always as an end (Hillar, 2003).We again see her e the theme of self-worth and respect, man and his reason is central in the ethical works of Kant. Even if for example in doing an act we would do so for the good of the majority, it would still not be valid if a minority would be sacrificed along the way. We do something because it ought to be done as determined by our reason and verified through and through the maxim which we test and attempt to put as a categorical imperative the latter could be thought of as the fixed rules that govern how we as rational agents act.The main criticisms to be raised with regards to other ethical theories are founded on the assumptions of Kant regarding the fulfillment of moral obligation for the sake of good in itself. Utilitarianism takes as a central part of its tenets, the concept of summum bonum (greatest good for the greatest number). If we look at this ethical expression we shall see that it would contradict with the flavour of Kant that Human Being should always be considered ends never as a means, not even for the greatest number.Problem may also arise in the altruistic claims of useful moralizing. One ought not to pursue something out of happiness or other virtues like Aristotles notion of the good man as the man of mean and virtues. This would not qualify for Kant as enough one thousand to pursue good, because as he had mentioned in the groundings, prior to the good is the good will with which there is no qualification (Johnson, 2004). If one is an individualist, he might more likely be pleased with the ethical prescriptions of Kant.I personally find strength in his moral philosophy in finding support for the lead to protect certain(a) inalienable rights. In focusing on a moral law, his theory is not vulnerable to the attacks of situational morality but rather focuses on the man as a rational being and a moral agent, whose will is in a sense the will of all (Baron, 1995). There is stableness and consistency in Kants moral philosophy by centering on the auton omy of all individuals under the precept that when it all boils down to it, man shares a common reason and will that would forfeit them to determine what is right from wrong.On the other hand I think that there are certain things in life wherein following the rules set through categorical imperatives would not suffice. There are moral dilemmas wherein human lives are hanged in the balance. Although reason can help us in making our decisions, the moral duties of Kant can only go so far. I am left to wonder how a person could be satisfied with himself in pointing the whereabouts of innocent African-Americans to deranged members of the Ku Klux Clan who are vowing to kill them on the base of operations of fulfilling his moral duty of always telling the truth.Take note, in Kants philosophy, there is no hierarchy of duties, one has to fulfill them all, regardless of the outcome.ReferencesBaron, Marcia, 1995, Kantian Ethics Almost Without Apology Cornell Cornell U. P. Hillar, Marian, 20 03, Kants Moral Axioms, Retrieved disdainful 3, 2007 from Socinian. org http//www. socinian. org/kant. html Johnson, Robert, 2004, Kants Moral Philosophy, Retrieved August 4, 2007 from Stanford http//plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/