KANT – the big picture Reason Duty The Categorical Imperative The Summum bonum A revised duty based system of ethics

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

• 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

RATIONALISM• 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• 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• 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.

The noumenal world “things in

themselves”– the reality that is beyond our

human experience and understanding

In other words..

The phenomenal world – things that are known about the world

through our senses

We are hard wired with concepts such as time and space that help us to understand the noumenal

world

We make sense of the world through the

spectacles of reason Rational –

reason and thought only

Empirical / sense experience

Kant considers both the empirical and the

rational

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

DesiresInclinations

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.

Reason

Human nature experiences the tension of desires

and inclinations versus their reason

God and angels areperfectly rational beings,

without appetites and desires to lead them astray from

following reason and objective moral laws.

Kant’s view of Human Nature

Phenomenal and Noumenal Realm

Desires & Reason

Phenomenal Realm Noumenal Realm

Humans are beings with reason and desires

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 KantPerfect duties• absolute prohibitions, e.g. • Do not murder• Do not lie

Imperfect duties• (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…

Even though this person is

technically my enemy, it is a duty to help others who

are in need

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

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

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

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

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 exampleIf 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!

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 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

Categorical ImperativeReason

Duty and the Good Will

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…

You are a slave to your desires

You are controlled by gravity, maybe someone pushed you off a building and you killed a child – it wasn’t your fault the child died

Something outside of you is telling you what to do

You are being forced to do something against your will

You are being trained / conditioned by external forces

You are being manipulated

You are genetically determined

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

Heteronomous – decisions made based on deterministic features outside of the self – this is not good if you are Kant

Obedience to someone in authority

Benefit to yourself - pleasure

curiosity

Considering the consequences, doing one thing for the sake of something else

Social conditioning

Autonomous – decisions should be based on freedom from deterministic features outside of the self, in other words, based on reason.

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

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”

My maxim is self love and personal advantage

because I am only thinking of myself

Is this right? Would we be in a moral society if everyone followed this rule?


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?


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?


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?


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?


• 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.


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


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.


• 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


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


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

A moral action is one performed out of a sense of duty

The Good will is the intention to do one’s duty

Motive and intention is superior to consequences

If we “can”, we “ought”

Morality applies to all rational beings

a moral action is defined as one that is determined by reason, not by our sensual impulses.

The principles upon which the pure practical reason operates can be measured against the criteria of the categorical imperative

Absolutist – not situationalIn order to act

with the good will, the will must act freely

Moral decisions should be autonomous - based on freedom from deterministic features outside of the self

Moral Law is an eternal unchanging moral system

Kant’s deontological ethics are

• Prescriptive - If you “can”, you “ought”• Absolutist – no exceptions can be applied• A prior – logic before experience• Objective – personal preference counts for

nothing• Right or wrong independent of the

consequences• All men have a duty to seek the highest form of

the good

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 EthicsCompatible

• 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 FinnisW D Ross - Revises deontological duty based ethics• 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

Finnis Revises the Natural Law Moral Theory1. 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-on-one 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

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!

Documents

KANT – the big picture Reason Duty The Categorical Imperative The Summum bonum A revised duty based system of ethics