KANT – the big picture
•
•
•
•
•
Reason
Duty
The Categorical Imperative
The Summum bonum
A revised duty based
system of ethics
Kant in context
•
•
•
•
1700-1800 Age of Enlightenment (Age of Reason)
Traditional ways of doing things were questioned by the use of science and
reason.
The scientific revolution was based on empirical observation and gave the
impression that the universe behaved according to universal and unchanging
laws.
This provided a model for looking rationally on human institutions as well as
nature.
REASON
1781
1788
1797
Up until Kant, there were 2 schools of
thought about knowledge and what
we “know”
EMPIRICISM
RATIONALISM
• The mind is a blank slate or
a tabula rasa, that becomes
populated with ideas by its
interactions with the world.
Experience teaches us
everything.
• Locke
• Hume
• The world was knowable a
priori, through an analysis
of ideas and derivations
done through logic.
Knowledge can be achieved
by means of reason.
• Descartes
• Leibniz
A priori
• A priori (before experience)
• You don’t have to study the
world to establish a fact
• THIS IS THE BASIS OF
RATIONALISM
A posterior
• A posterior (after
experience)
• We can only know about
the world around us
through our sense
experiences only
• THIS IS THE BASIS OF
EMPIRICISM
Further….
Analytic propositions
Synthetic propositions
• Analytic propositions are
known to be true before
experience because their
denial would involve a
contradiction
• "that husband is a man," I
know this judgment is true
without having to look at
anything or observe anything
because the concept
“husband” is defined by the
fact that he will be “male”.
• DEFINITION
• Synthetic propositions have to
be judged true or false based
on the experience of the world
• "the book is on the desk“ is a
synthetic judgment because
the concept “desk" is found no
where in "book."
• "The book is on the desk," is
not known by thinking about
books and desks, but by
looking at the book and the
desk.
• INFORMATION
What is an analytic proposition and
what is a synthetic proposition?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
All bachelors are unmarried men
All bachelors are happy
There are other people in the school building
A kangaroo is an animal
All crows are black
All sisters are female
7 + 5 = 12
Everything that is green is coloured
What is an analytic proposition and
what is a synthetic proposition?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
All bachelors are unmarried men
All bachelors are happy
There are other people in the school building
A kangaroo is an animal
All crows are black
All sisters are female
7 + 5 = 12
Everything that is green is coloured
7 + 5 = 12
• Kant would say something like this is synthetic
and a priori
• A priori because it is a mathematical truth
independent of sensory experience
• Synthetic because we have no concept of “12”
without experience of the concept of numbers
and numerical progression
• Kant’s primary aim is to determine the limits
and scope of pure reason. That is, he wants to
know what reason alone can determine
without the help of the senses.
• Kant does not assert that pure reason has the
power to grasp the mysteries of the universe.
Instead, he suggests that much of what we
consider to be reality is shaped by the
perceiving mind.
A third way
• Kant’s contribution to the world is that he came up with
another way of Knowing that consisted of knowledge
before sense experience and truths that are judged by
having experience.
• Kant used examples form maths and science as examples of
synthetic a priori statements
• “the angles of a triangle always add up to 180 degrees” are
known a priori, but they cannot be known merely from an
analysis of the concepts of matter or triangle. We must “go
outside and beyond the concept.”
• Study of the natural world is empirical but the ordering and
classification of the natural world is done through reason
Statements about the Moral Law
• These are also synthetic and a priori because
ethical knowledge comes from pure reason
(rather than sense experience) but may also
be right or wrong ( verified by external sense
experiences)
• For Kant, the moral law was unchanging and
can be known independent of experience but
its’ application is dependant upon our
understanding of the world.
PURE REASON
• Pure reason is capable of
knowing important truths
• Pure reason has limits
• We can have no certain
knowledge about the nature of
what is actually “out there,”
independent of our minds
• Much of what we consider to
be reality is shaped by the
perceiving mind
• If all the events in our
experience take place in time,
that is because our mind
arranges sensory experience.
In other words..
Kant considers both the
empirical and the
rational
The noumenal
world “things in
themselves”– the
reality that is
beyond our
human
experience and
understanding
Empirical / sense
experience
We make sense
of the world
through the
spectacles of
reason
We are hard wired with concepts
such as time and space that help
us to understand the noumenal
world
The phenomenal
world – things
that are known
about the world
through our
senses
Rational –
reason and
thought only
This is significant because
We are “sentient”
beings who respond
to our pleasures and
our pains but we are
also have reason,
which in Kant’s
ethical system must
be sovereign.
Morality applies to
all rational beings,
and a moral action is
defined as one that is
determined by
reason, not by our
sensual impulses.
Pure practical reason
• Morality is a positive act that we take in order
to shape our world
• It is practical reason in action
• There is an objective criteria for morality
• Right and wrong can be logically determined
• The principles upon which the pure practical
reason operates can be measured against the
criteria of the categorical imperative
Kant’s view of Human Nature
Humans are beings with reason and desires
Desires
Inclinations
Animals follow their desires
and inclinations only. They
have no reason, so behave in
accordance to the empirical
realm of cause and effect,
led by their appetite
and instincts.
Phenomenal Realm
Reason
Desires & Reason
Human nature experiences
the tension of desires
and inclinations
versus their reason
God and angels are
perfectly rational beings,
without appetites and desires
to lead them astray from
following reason and
objective moral laws.
Phenomenal and Noumenal Realm
Noumenal Realm
Consider these points …..
• What do we have more control over…..our
reasons or our desires? Use examples
• Kant believed that reason should be sovereign
over emotions and desires…..what would
Aquinas or Aristotle have said?
• Should moral actions be based on reason or
on emotion? What are the advantages and
disadvantages of each?
• Aquinas said that reason can be clouded because
humans are working towards perfection, hence
the difference between real and apparent goods,
where people think that they are doing the right
thing but they are not really doing the right thing
• The development of virtues in Natural Law
Theory are about the development of habit and
being exposed to situations over a life time to
understand how to behave in the right way, at the
right time in the right place….arguably, you need
intuition or emotions to be able to do this
DUTY
Re-cap Pure practical reason
•
•
•
•
Morality is practical reason in action
There is an objective criteria for morality
Right and wrong can be logically determined
The principles upon which the pure practical
reason operates can be measured against the
criteria of the categorical imperative
DUTY
• A moral action is one performed out of a sense of
duty, rather than simply out of inclination or
feeling or the possibility of some gain for the
person performing the act.
• Acting purely from feelings means that an action
is not a moral one.
• A moral action is one where the motives for the
action are based on reason. If you “can”, it
means you “ought”
• Duty is willing obedience to universal laws
• Duty is a universal obligation
DUTY
•
•
•
•
•
To oneself
To others
To family
To society
To God
Scenario
• You have made a promise to help a friend with
her Ethics homework on Wednesday night, your
(other) friend sends you a text message asking if
you want to take up the orange Wednesday offer
and go and see a film on the Wednesday.
• You want to go to the cinema but you are
obligated (you have a duty) to help your friend.
• There is a clash between desire and duty.
Other scenarios – what is the
desire, what is the duty /
obligation?
• You had planned to go out on New Year’s Eve but your
baby sitter has let you down at the last minute
• Someone you know needs a lift home but you know
that by taking them home you are going to get stuck in
traffic
• You see a homeless person and give that person the
money you were going to buy a coffee with
• You are the classroom teacher of Jonny (who is really
rude to you on a regular basis) and he has handed
homework in to you which is really really good and
worthy of a vivo
DUTY according to Kant
Perfect duties
Imperfect duties
• absolute prohibitions, e.g.
• Do not murder
• Do not lie
• (normally) relative
exhortations, e.g.
• Do not steal
• Help others in need
• Develop one's talents
According to Kant's theory:
• (a) Perfect duties
never conflict
• (b) If a perfect duty
conflicts with an
imperfect duty, then
one must fulfil the
perfect duty e.g. if the
duty to help others
and the duty not to lie
conflict (i.e. the only
way to help others in
this situation is to lie),
then one must not lie,
and hence, not help
others
Hume Vs Kant
Hume
• Reason alone cannot be a
motive to the will, but
rather is the “slave of the
passions”
• Moral distinctions are not
derived from reason
• Feelings such as
benevolence and generosity
are proper moral
motivations
Kant
• “Suppose a man does an
action for the sake of duty
alone, for the first time his
action has genuine moral
worth… a moral worth
beyond all comparison the
highest… he does good not
from inclination, but from
duty”. (Groundwork)
Same action – different motive
When people hear
about me saving this
man half beaten to
death, I am gonna be
so popular…
Look at that poor
man, I bet he is in a
lot of pain….I
suppose I should
help him, I wouldn’t
like to feel pain in
that way
Even though this
person is
technically my
enemy, it is a duty
to help others who
are in need
According to Kant it is
all about the motive
but is there anything
wrong with doing a
good deed out of
compassion or
feeling?
Kant is very critical of Utilitarianism
because …
The happiness principle contributes nothing whatever
toward establishing morality, since making a man
happy is quite different from making him good.
Basing morality on interests and preferences destroys
its dignity. It doesn’t teach us how to distinguish right
from wrong, but “only to become better at
calculation”
Happiness
• We should perform good deeds because they make us feel
happy.
• If we feel happy by doing our duty then that is fine, but
equally, emotion should take no part in performing a moral
act.
• When we perform the highest good we are in a state of
happiness.
Happiness and consequences
• Practical reason is there to develop the good
will, not to achieve happiness.
• Actions are right independent of
consequences
Re-cap
• A moral action is one performed out of a
sense of duty, rather than simply out of
inclination or feeling or the possibility of some
gain for the person performing the act.
• Morality applies to all rational beings, and a
moral action is defined as one that is
determined by reason, not by our sensual
impulses.
The Categorical Imperative
•
•
•
•
•
•
Imperatives – hypothetical and categorical
Maxims
Three formulations
Universal Law
Humans as ends not means
A kingdom of ends
Imperative
Hypothetical Imperative
• If…..then
• If you want to stay healthy then take exercise
regularly
• If you want your husband to love you then
remember his birthday
• If you want to get to Cambridge by midday then
catch the 10.35 from King’s Cross
• Antecedent
• consequent
The hypothetical imperative in every
day usage
• Nearly all imperatives we use are hypothetical
in nature, the antecedent is not always there
but it is implicit
• What is the antecedent to these imperatives?
• Do your homework
• Practise the flute
• Cross the road on the zebra crossing
• Don’t drive over 30 miles an hour
The hypothetical Imperative
• You have a reason to do one course of action
because it is a means to an end of another action.
• It is conditional
• The antecedent part of the hypothetical
imperative is based on desire for a course of
action
• Kant said that morality should not be based on
desire / inclination so the use of the hypothetical
imperative cannot be used as a measurement of
duty
Remember the Good Samaritan – spot
the hypothetical imperative
If I help this man then I
will be popular, so I am
going to help him
Look at that poor
man, I wouldn’t like
to feel pain in that
way, if I help him
then someone else
might help me if I
am in the same
situation
This person is
technically my
enemy, I may not
benefit from this
course of action
because I could be
ostracised by my
own community
and in the same
situation, he may
not pay me back,
however, it is a
duty to help
others who are in
need
Categorical Imperative
• Does not have the antecedent “if”
• Does not depend on desires or goals
• Moral commands are based on an objective a
priori law of reason that applies to everyone
• Categorical imperatives are arrived at through
practical reasoning
• Each person must act according to a sense of
duty that comes from rationality not inclination
• Categorical imperatives demand unconditional
obedience
Maxims
• Maxims are general principles underlying any
action, for example • If I send a Christmas card to everyone in my
school, my maxim (underlying principle) may
be that I want everyone to like me and that I
want to get lots of cards in return – my action
is based on underlying principles which will
serve myself and make me feel better
Kant used this example
If I short change this
customer in front of me
then other customers might
find out and they won’t
come to my shop anymore
so I won’t short change this
customer
BAD Maxim
If all shopkeepers short
changed their customers
then what kind of world
would we be living in?
Its wrong to short
change a customer so I
won’t do it!
GOOD Maxim
What are the possible maxims of these
actions
• I am going to sell my birthday presents that I
don’t want on e-bay
• I am going to give my birthday presents that I
don’t want to the local charity shop
• I am not going to kill anyone
• Are any of them for selfish reasons or to
satisfy desires?
The maxims of the categorical
imperative
• The categorical imperative is a command to perform
actions that are absolute moral obligations without
reference to other ends and it rests on three maxims which
are also described as formulas
• Act as if the maxim of your action was to become through
your will a universal law of nature – the Formula of the Law
of Nature
• Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether
in your own person or in the person of any other, never
simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end –
the Formula of the End in itself
• Act as if you were through your maxims a law making
member of a kingdom of ends - The Formula of the
Kingdom of Ends
In order to understand Kant you have
to make the connections
Duty and the Good Will
Categorical
Imperative
Reason
Freedom / autonomy
The Good Will
• Only a good will is good without qualification
• A will is good if it acts from duty
• Moral obligation is to be found in the mind – not
by considering experiences
• Reason must not be subservient to anything else,
even if this is the happiness of the majority
• The good will is the intention to do one’s duty but
it must be done out of freedom and autonomy
You are not free if…
Something outside of you is
telling you what to do
You are controlled by gravity,
You are a slave to your desires
maybe someone pushed you off a building
and you killed a child – it wasn’t your fault
the child died
You are being forced to do
something against your will
You are being
manipulated
You are genetically determined
You are being trained / conditioned by external forces
When Kant talks about autonomous
actions, he is talking about freedom
• Moral acts can only be performed autonomously
(freely)
• Hypothetical imperatives are based on desires
that control us (if we are controlled by desire we
are not free)
• In order to act with the good will, the will must
act autonomously (freely)
• To act autonomously, a person must act
according to a rule that a person gives
themselves (rules can’t come from outside of
yourself)
Decision making in Kant’s ethical
theory
Autonomous –
decisions should be
based on freedom
from deterministic
features outside of the
self, in other words,
based on reason.
Obedience
to
someone in
authority
Benefit to
yourself pleasure
Considering the
consequences,
doing one thing for
the sake of
something else
curiosity
Heteronomous –
decisions made
based on
deterministic
features outside
of the self – this
is not good if
you are Kant
Social
conditioning
Categorical Imperative (Maxim 1)
• Act as if the maxim of your action was to
become through your will a universal law of
nature (the Formula of the Law of Nature)
• Would you like everyone else in the same
situation to act in the same way as you?
Categorical Imperative (1) Make your
will a universal law of nature
I really need this money
but I know I can’t pay it
back. I will pretend that
I can pay it back
My maxim is self love
and personal advantage
because I am only
thinking of myself
Universal Maxim =
“whenever I am short of
money and I know I
can’t pay it back I will
promise to pay it back
even though I don’t
intend to”
Is this right? Would we be in
a moral society if everyone
followed this rule?
Categorical Imperative (1) Make your
will a universal law of nature
I am obviously talented and
my talents can have
benefits to others but I am
going to give this up I want
to indulge in other
pleasures
I am going to act on
the maxim of self
indulgence
Universal maxim =
“Neglect your
natural gifts to
indulge in personal
gratification”
If everyone did this, would it be right?
Categorical Imperative (1) Make your
will a universal law of nature
I would like to get all of
the health risks
associated with
smoking
My maxim is to self
destruct and have
disregard for
anyone else
Universal maxim = “Do
what you want to do
even if that means
that you inflict
suffering on yourself
and others”
Is that right?
Categorical Imperative (1) Make your
will a universal law of nature
I would never usually kill
someone but that person
really annoyed me. I only
did it because I knew I could
get away with it
My maxim is based
on satisfying my
own desires and
escaping
consequences
Universal maxim =
“Only kill other people
when you are sure
that you can get away
with it”
Is that right?
Categorical Imperative (1) Make your
will a universal law of nature
Our country is at threat
from another country
My maxim is if I am
threatened, it is my
right to counter
that force by threat
Universal maxim =
“When under threat,
everyone has a right to
defend themselves”
Is that right?
Categorical Imperative (Maxim 2)
• Act in such a way that you always treat
humanity, whether in your own person or in
the person of any other, never simply as a
means, but always at the same time as an
end. (The Formula of the End in Itself)
Categorical Imperative (2) Humans as
ends not means
I will pay you less so that you are
forced to work harder. The harder
you work, the more you make, the
more you make the more profit I
can make.
Categorical Imperative (2) Humans as
ends not means
If I pull this lever, I will save the
lives of four people but it means
that I will be using the life of one
person as a means to save the
lives of the four –what to do?
Compare what a Utilitarian would
do when faced with the trolley
dilemma with what Kant would
do
Categorical Imperative (2) Humans as
ends not means
Universal maxim = “When under
threat, everyone has a right to
defend themselves” BUT in order
to do this, I have to use the lives
of people to be soldiers and these
people become a means to an
end.
Categorical Imperative (Maxim 3)
• Act as if you were through your maxims a law
making member of a kingdom of ends (the
Formula of the Kingdom of Ends)
Categorical Imperative (3) The
Kingdom of Ends
I have to write a law for
a new kingdom where
everyone is treated as a
person who is an end in
themselves and no-one
is used as a means to
another end. In this
Kingdom, all laws are
based on duty bound
universal maxims
Categorical Imperative (3) The
Kingdom of Ends
That should do it! Everyone will follow them!
If everyone DID
follow them then the
world would be a
better place – I wonder
why they don’t
Categorical Imperative (3) The
Kingdom of Ends
War has been fought
and now we are a free,
autonomous and
liberated country. We
are now going to govern
ourselves by the
principles of pure
practical reason – our
desires are not even
going to be a
consideration
Re-cap
• What is the Categorical Imperative
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the
Categorical Imperative
The Summum bonum
• The highest good
where virtue and
happiness meet
• Think of it as the icing
on the cake, think how
all of Kant’s ideas
come together in the
concept of the highest
good
Summum bonum
• Kant had faith in the justice of the universe.
• If the universe is fair, then those who are
virtuous but treated unfairly in this life will be
rewarded in an after life.
• Through perfect obedience to the universal
laws it is possible to achieve the highest good.
• Kant believed that all people could be moral
Moral Law is a priori.
Right and wrong can
be logically
determined
If we “can”, we
“ought”
Moral Law is an
eternal
unchanging
moral system
A moral action is one
performed out of a
sense of duty
The principles upon
which the pure
practical reason
operates can be
measured against
the criteria of the
categorical
imperative
Moral decisions
should be
autonomous based on
freedom from
deterministic
features outside
of the self
In order to act
with the good
will, the will
must act freely
a moral action is
defined as one that
is determined by
reason, not by our
sensual impulses.
Absolutist – not
situational
Motive and
intention is
superior to
consequences
The Good will is
the intention to
do one’s duty
Morality applies to
all rational beings
Kant’s deontological ethics are
The Summum bonum rests on three postulates
(assumptions that you take for granted)
• Freedom
• Immortality
• God’s existence
• Without these,
there can be no
higher good
Summum bonum - Postulate
(assumption) 1 - Freedom
• The will is the only thing in our control
• Only autonomous acts are moral acts - We
only perform moral acts when we are free
• Because we “can”, we “ought”
• Consequences of actions are often outside of
our control but we have freedom over our
intentions and motives
• We don’t always have control over our
emotions but we do have control over our will
Summum bonum Postulate
(assumption) 2 -Immortality
• We act morally to be worthy of happiness
• The highest good is a state where happiness and virtue
are united
• Happiness is not always guaranteed for the person who
has a “good will” because the world has misery in it
• The Summum bonum cannot be achieved in this life
and so there must be a life after death where it can be
achieved.
• This is good for those people who sacrifice their lives
because of a sense of duty (but not those people who
martyr themselves because their maxim is to get to
paradise)
Summum bonum Postulate
(assumption) 2 –the existence of God
• A moral Law is meaningless unless God existed
• Because the Summum bonum is only possible
in the after life then God must exist as an after
life is not possible without God
• God has ordered the world in a way that
allows the highest good to be possible.
• God’s role here is regulative – the belief in
God helps us to understand our world
GOD
• Kant’s view of ethics is that human reason must be
autonomous – therefore, following the divine
commands is heteronomous and Kant rejects Divine
Commands as the source of all morality.
• For Kant, Philosophy had supremacy over Theology
because philosophy is based on reason and religious
belief is based on unsupported faith claims.
• Kant questioned the fact that we could know God but
he did have faith in the existence of God.
• Even though we cannot prove that God exists, we have
to act as if he existed.
Kant and Christian Ethics
Compatible
• Jesus’ Golden Rule is good as a
universal Maxim – Kant would be
happy with that
• The second formula of the
categorical imperative – treat
humans as ends in themselves is
compatible with the nature and
intrinsic value of humans
• The existence of God underpins all
of Kant's basis of ethics – the
highest good (summum bonum) is
dependant on God existing
• Good action is rewarded by an
after life
• Humans created by God can
access reason that God has given
them (also compatible with
Natural Law Theory)
Questionable
•
•
•
•
•
Did Jesus use reason or emotion
when he acted?
Contrary to Kant, Jesus said that law
is given to help humans how to live,
Kant believed that the moral law
within was eternal and unchanging
Jesus broke some laws where Kant
believed that doing your duty would
be universal for all time and
situations
Kant puts philosophy and reason as
superior to religious belief
Do we even need God in Kant’s
theory – if there was no God would
it make any difference to a person
accessing the moral law within?
A more reasonable system of
deontological ethics?
• W D Ross argued that duty is part of the
fundamental nature of the universe
• He revived duty based ethics but stressed
personal character of duty
• He said that there are 7 basic duties which
take precedence over all other duties
• These are referred to as prima facie duties
(first sight duties)
Prima facie duties
• Fidelity – the duty to keep promises
• Reparation – the duty to compensate others
when we harm them
• Gratitude – the duty to thank those who help us
• Justice – the duty to recognise merit
• Beneficence – the duty to improve the conditions
of others
• Self improvement – the duty to improve our
virtue and intelligence
• Nonmaleficence – the duty not to injure others
Intuition
• It may not always be obvious which duty take
priority but we are at liberty to use out intuition
when faced with a dilemma.
• If, when we are confused about the course of
action, and we resort to depending on our
deepest moral convictions, then how can this
help us anymore – we are already confused!
• Ross does not really respond to this but is his
duty based ethics more user friendly than Kants?
Compare W D Ross with Finnis
W D Ross - Revises deontological
duty based ethics
Finnis Revises the Natural Law
Moral Theory
•
•
1.
Life: The preservation of life, leading a
healthy life, the right to a good quality of life
2.
Knowledge: To understand the world around
us, helping us to develop as humans
3.
Play: The enjoyment in things, deriving
pleasure from activities
4.
Aesthetic experience: Appreciating beauty in
what we see and what we create
5.
Sociability: Our relationships, from one-onone to a global scale, acting for others
6.
Practical reasonableness: Deciding how to
act morally based on our knowledge and
experience
7.
Religion: More than just religious affiliation;
Ultimate questions and striving for meaning
•
•
•
•
•
Fidelity – the duty to keep promises
Reparation – the duty to compensate
others when we harm them
Gratitude – the duty to thank those
who help us
Justice – the duty to recognise merit
Beneficence – the duty to improve
the conditions of others
Self improvement – the duty to
improve our virtue and intelligence
Nonmaleficence – the duty not to
injure others
Are the newer versions better than
the original ones?
FINALLY
• Go away and re-read all your notes
• Talk ethics with other people
• Teach other people about the various ethical
systems
• Do more reading to develop your understanding
• Practise as many past exam questions as you can
– use all terminology
• Guess what the examiner might ask you in May!