Running Head: Philosophy
1
Philosophy
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Instructor’s Name
Date
Philosophy
2
1. Reason and moral virtue according to Immanuel Kant
Kant set the foundation for his Moral philosophy on three main writings: Critique of Practical
Reason, Metaphysics of Morals, and Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Emmanuel
Kant, in the Groundwork, used a technique which involved attempting to change human’s daily,
apparent, rational knowledge of morality into idealistic knowledge. His latter two writings were
based on a technique of using sensible reason that is grounded only on things about which
rationale can tell us as opposed to obtaining any principles from past experience in getting to
conclusions that are able to be applied to the world experience.
He is renowned for his philosophy that there is a solitary moral responsibility. He referred to
this theory as Categorical Imperative, which is generated from the idea of responsibility. He
defines the requirements of the moral law as definite imperatives, which are values that are
fundamentally valid. These principles are superior in and of themselves. According to him, these
principles ought to be observed in their entirety, and by all, circumstances as well conditions if
human character and conduct is to follw the moral law. “From these principles all our moral
duties and obligations are obtained or created, and by which all moral duties can be evaluated 1”.
He also argues that the moral means as well as outcomes can be applied to these principles, that
reasoning humans can seek particular ends using the most proper means. “The moral law is a
principle of reason itself. It is not based on dependent facts about the world, including what
could make us happy, but to act upon the moral law that has no other intention or goal apart from
1
Sullivan, Roger J. Immanuel Kant's Moral Theory. Cambridge [England]: Cambridge
University Press, 1989.
Philosophy
3
worthiness of being happy. Moral obligation only applies to rational (reason) agents"2. He
supposed that in case an act is performed with the intention of responsibility, then it lacks moral
worth. Instead, any action ought to have absolute goal (reason) driving it or the act would lack
meaning. According to him, the outcome of an action is not the most significant aspect of an
action, rather it is how an individual feels while doing the act that value is attached to the
outcome of the action.
2. J.S. Mill's understanding of human nature (for example, individuality) and
rationality in his approach to liberty
According to John S. Mills, logic characterizes human nature. An individual behaves in a
specific manner as directed by reason. “The human nature is driven by reason, which overrides
all other elements which could appear to be taking place in his life. On Liberty, Mills argues that
the human has the sole right to conduct himself in a manner that he deems benefits him most,
and should be free to conduct himself in that manner”3. This forms the base for his utilitarianism
perspective, which argues that human nature is one that aims at giving him optimum benefits. In
such a way, an individual is the sovereign.
Mills argues that individuality is a prerequisite to attaining higher pleasures. According to
him individuality has an inalienable, indivisible and inherent value to humanity. It is
individuality which thrive the human to attaining higher pleasures. Mills believes that a society
must try to promote individuality since it is a pre-condition for diversity and creativity in human
2
Gert, Bernard. Morality Its Nature and Justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=13
8257>.
3
Hellsten, Sirkku. In Defense of Moral Individualism. Helsinki: Univ, 1997.
Philosophy
4
nature. According to him, conformity is disastrous. He believes that actions do not matter so
much. Instead, he argues that the person or individual behind the action together with the action
are valuable. According to him it really of significance, not only what people do, but also what
cadre or types of men they are that do the action.
On rationality, Mills argues that man is naturally rational. He asserts that reason is the
main element that shapes and drives an individual. “Man is hence naturally rational and is guided
by reason. In this sense therefore, there should be limited control on an individual by other
surrounding individuals, society or a government”4.
3. How John Rawls' Theory of Justice carry forward the modern social contract
theory while also drawing on Kant.
John Rawls is basically recognized for his philosophy of “Justice as Fairness”. Rawls’ theory
of Justice establishes a framework which elucidates the importance, in a community presumed to
comprise of liberal and equal citizens, of individual as well as political freedoms, of equal
chance, and supportive strategies that promote the needs of the more as well as the less
privileged and vulnerable individuals in a society or citizenry.
Rawls’ idea of righteousness is an associational conception. It primarily centers on
relationships between individual members of an association. He is basically concerned with the
political association referred to as the modern nation-state. Rawls’ theory of Justice is founded
on the relationships between individuals within an association. “The theory urges us make a
society which is a fair system of cooperation and good relations over time. The relationships
4
Mill, John Stuart, and Stefan Collini. On Liberty. Cambridge: Univ. Press, 1995.
Philosophy
5
referred to by the theory are those of citizenship, which is interaction of citizens within the
primary structure of society. This is a structure in which individuals only enter by birth and exit
only by death”5.
Rawls theory of Justice develops principles of justice that are vital in governing a modern
social order based on the theory of social contract. This is basically how Rawls’ Theory of
Justice carries forward Modern Social Contract Theory. Moreover, one of the most revisited
components on Rawls’ perspective of Justice as Fairness according to his theory is his
‘designing’ device referred to as Original Position. “The Original Position has always been
compared to the ‘state of nature’ or rather pre-political state of humanity that was significant in
philosophies of earlier Modern Social Contract philosophers”6. In reference to ideas of political
thinkers including Kant, Hobbes, Locke among others, so as to conceptualize political duty, one
must, firstly, understand what human societies were like prior to the conception of ordered
societies under laws as well as governments, and in that case, ask himself what basis would have
driven individuals to establish an ordered society. Lastly, one should try to know what values
individuals in the pre-political state could have selected to control their relations in a community
under set law system and government. Rawls’ Theory of Justice hence carry forward Modern
Social Contract Theory, which according to Kant, the sovereignty lies with the people and the
5
Rawls, John, and Erin Kelly. Justice As Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap,
2001.
6
Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University
Press,1971.
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=28
2760>.
Philosophy
6
leaders are expected to do justice to the citizens by achieving what they are expected of them
according to law
Philosophy
7
Bibliography
Gert, Bernard. Morality Its Nature and Justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&
AN=138257>.
Hellsten, Sirkku. In Defense of Moral Individualism. Helsinki: Univ, 1997.
Mill, John Stuart, and Stefan Collini. On Liberty. Cambridge: Univ. Press, 1995.
Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,
1971.
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&
AN=28 2760>.
Rawls, John, and Erin Kelly. Justice As Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap,
2001.
Sullivan, Roger J. Immanuel Kant's Moral Theory. Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University
Press, 1989.