Aspect of Moral Argument
you must know
Content
Kant
We experience moral choice and duty. We know what we ought to do. There is an innate moral structure to world. We are obliged to obey
this Law . Because we ought to do this, we can. Aim of life is to develop The Good Will. Kant said that there were 2 commands in life –
hypothetical and categorical . Hypothetical – if you wish to do this you must do that – free to reject. If you want to do well in your AS, you
must learn the material. Categorical – these commands cannot be questioned. 2 versions of Categorical Imperative. 1. Will what we do as a
universal law (in other words, do as you would be done by) . 2. Always treat people as an end in themselves and never simply as a means to
an end (in other words, don’t use others). In Ancient Greece stated Kant, people believed that ethics and happiness were combined in this
life; if you were good, you would be happy. Kant rejected this. Instead believed that it was a postulate of practical reason (a practical idea) for
us to assume the existence of a world and a Being which linked happiness and virtue. He believed it was logical that virtue would be
rewarded eventually. This he called the Summum Bonum or Highest Good. For Kant, belief in God and an After Life was a practical
necessity. For Kant, the world was only intelligible , it only made sense, when happiness and virtue were connected by God. A belief in God is
morally necessary.
He may believe it is logical that God exists but that does not mean God actually does exist. Kant’s morality may lead to another law-giver than
God. Kant’s theory does not prove God’s existence but assumes God’s existence. Morality could be the result of evolution . People could
criticise religion as unethical (eg wars). Kant believes ought implies can but jut because we ought to do something does not mean we can or
because we can do something does not mean we ought to.
Father of Psychology . First to help mentally ill professionally. Naturalistic explanation of religion. Use hypnosis to cure hysteria/ neurosis.
Found it was result of emotional trauma and repressed emotions. We have unconscious and conscious mind. Freud calls the following the
psychic apparatus. EGO = conscious self . ID = repressed / forgotten memories. SUPER EGO = Driving moral force, internal voice, conscience
gained from parents / society – morality comes from here – internalised voice makes us feel guilty (conscience) and praises us (ego ideal).
Ego ideal = rules for good behaviour . Ego negotiates conflicts between id and superego. Freud gives the analogy of a horse and rider. The rider
(ego) controls the way the horse (id) goes. Sometimes, control fails and the horse goes the way it wishes to go, over rocky terrain. But the
ego has to battle with the external world and the super-ego as well as with the id. When this happens, the ego tends to be more loyal to the id,
avoiding conflict, excusing problems. The super-ego, however watches the ego’s actions like a hawk, punishing it with feelings of inferiority,
anxiety and general guilt. The ego does have defence mechanisms, such as fantasy, rationalisation, repression and others. For Freud, the
super-ego symbolically internalises the sense of a father figure and the regulations found in society. It tends to oppose the id, giving us a
sense of the moral and, setting up taboos against certain types of feelings and actions.
Religion created by tribe that murdered male authority figure and felt guilty. Religion is a crutch for the weak . Religion is OCD – universal
obsessional neurosis. The Oediupus Complex whereby the child is more attached to the mother, jealous of the father and thus projects this
guilt on to a male God figure. If the Oedipus complex (which inclines men to sleep with their mothers and kill their fathers) is particularly
repressed, through parents, schooling and authority figures in general, the stricter will be the rule of the super-ego over the ego, and the
stronger the sense of the moral and of conscience castigating our urge.
Freud’s pupil Carl Jung, took a different view. He believed religion harmonised the psyche and believed that there were common archetypes in
people’s minds.
Criticisms of Kant
Freud