Kant
• Good Will
– Morally praiseworthy actions are
done from a sense of duty.
• Our duty is to follow the right
moral rules.
Imperatives
• Moral rules contrast with the
rules of prudence.
– You ought to keep your promises.
– If you want a safe car, buy a
Volvo.
• Moral rules are categorical
imperatives.
– They are not dependent on any
particular desire.
• Prudential rules are hypothetical
imperatives.
– They are binding only on those
with the appropriate desire.
Two Versions of the
Categorical Imperative
• Follow moral rules that are
universalizable.
– This means you should only
accept a moral rule that a rational
person would accept as binding
for all persons.
• Always treat persons as ends
and never merely as means.
– This means that we should
recognize that each person has the
same basic moral worth as we do.
Universalizability and
Respect for Persons
• Moral principles are
universalizable.
• The only condition under which
this can be true is if something
is intrinsically valuable and
hence an end we all share.
• The only thing which is
intrinsically good is humanity
either in myself or in others.
• So the end of morality is to
respect humanity in myself and
other persons.
Decision procedure
– Describe morally relevant features
of case.
– Look for principles.
– Evaluate principles by using one
or both versions of the categorical
imperative.
– Apply principle.
– Describe actions which conform
to principle.
– Assign praise or blame by looking
at intentions.
Alternative Decision
Procedure
• Apply the second version
directly.
– Ask what action would be
consistent with treating persons as
morally valuable and not as mere
means to achieve some particular
goal.
Moral Rights
• differ from legal rights
• are claims that society should
enforce
• imply duties
• cannot be waived
• cannot be overridden
• apply universally
Moral Rights and Legal
Rights
• We have legal rights solely on
the basis of what is granted by
our legal/political institutions.
• We have moral rights in virtue
of characteristics we share as
humans.
Moral rights and
enforcement
• If someone has a moral right,
then the rest of us are obligated
to enforce that right.
Moral Rights and Duties
• Negative Rights View
– If P has a right to X, then
everyone else is required to
refrain from interfering with P’s
having X.
• Positive Rights View
– If P has a right to X, then
everyone else is required to
refrain from interfering AND
should cooperate, when necessary,
in P’s having or doing X.
Moral Rights cannot be
waived
• If someone has a right to
something, they can not give up
this right.
Moral rights cannot be
overridden
• If someone has a right to
something, the right claim is the
most important consideration.
Moral rights are
universal
• If someone has a moral right,
then everyone else has the same
right.
Who has rights?
• All humans
• All rational creatures
• All creatures who possess the
relevant properties.
• Some properties which have
been suggested:
–
–
–
–
rationality
moral agency
moral emotion
human biology
Decision Procedure
• What possible rights are
involved?
• Are these really rights?
– Should society enforce this claim
for everyone?
– Do we have duties with respect to
X?
– Can P give up the claim to X?
– Would it be OK to ignore X if it
conflicted with some other
consideration?
Decision Procedure
• Are the rights being violated?
• What would respecting these
rights require?
• If rights are coming into
conflict, how can we balance
them?