Kant - Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals
From The Inferno
Kant - Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals
Contents |
[edit] Author’s Notes/Introduction
[edit] Premises
- Rationality : For Kant, only rationality implies necessity, and can therefore serve as a moral command.
- Will : Only a good will is absolutely good. A will is good independent of its object, and is therefore good only “in the form of willing”. For Kant, a good will must be rational, and “the form of willing” is autonomy.
- Autonomy of the Will : A will is autonomous by being free from all that is not rational. It is not free what rationality .
[edit] Central Ideas
[edit] Categorical Imperative
- An imperative has two important characteristics: 1) It is a moral command, i.e., necessary. 2) It pre-supposes an imperfect will. A perfect will would by its own inclination do what is morally commanded. Only an imperfect will, which would not necessarily by its own inclination do what is commanded, can be subject to an imperative, which commands against the will’s inclinations.
- Categorical imperative vs. Hypothetical imperative : Hypothetical imperative is an imperative with a view toward an end. Categorical imperative holds in all circumstances, independent of an end. It can be inferred that the hypothetical imperative is not derived from reason a priori, whereas the categorical imperative is.
[edit] Formulations of the Categorical Imperative
- Universal Law Formulation/Universal Law of Nature Formulation: Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law/universal law of nature (30).
- End-in-Itself Formulation: Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means (36).
- Autonomy Formulation: Every rational being as a will legislates universal law (38).
- Kingdom-of-Ends Formulation: Every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends (43).
[edit] Third Section
Kant tries to grapple with the question of how a categorical imperative is possible, which for him, is a synthetic a priori proposition. He tries to solve the conflict between his incompatibilism and the premise of the autonomy of the will.
[edit] Comparison with others
Comparison with Mill: Biggest difference is that Kant measures morality by motivation, whereas Mill measures it by consequences. Similar in that both, unlike virtue ethics, have rather objective standards for measuring morality. Comparison with Nietzsche: Drastically different because Kant provides a taxonomic account of morality, whereas Nietzsche takes a genealogical account.
