ETHICS - Midterms

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) you can at the same time will that it become a
What can I know? universal law.” (4:421)
Critique of Pure Reason (1781)
What ought I do? “Act as if the maxim of your action were to
Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals become by your will a universal law of
(1785); Critique of Practical Reason (1788) nature.” (4:421)
What can I hope for?
Critique of Judgment (1790); Religion within THE HUMANITY FORMULA
the Limits of Reason Alone (1793) “Never act in a way that you treat Humanity,
whether self or others, as a means only but
Hypothetical Imperative always as an end in itself.”
- an “if then” type of command- desire some
end. Distinction between ends that we “might “So act that you use humanity, whether in
will” and those which we “must will. your own person or that of another, always at
- Happiness- indeterminate- happy without; the same time as an end, never merely as a
happy with. means.”
Categorical Imperative -​ Respect for persons’ wills.
- Act only in accordance with that maxim -​ Regard is not a matter of degree or
through which you can at the same time will standard of judgment.
that it become a universal law.
- Incorporates your reason as law. What Respect for Persons
world becomes by this law. -​ Persons include “man and any
- Becomes a universal law governing all rational being”
rational agents. -​ Those who act only according to their
personal inclinations and wants are
Hypothetical vs Categorical Imperatives not persons.
Hypothetical imperative: -​ Rational persons have freedom of will;
• What I ought to do if some conditions hold. they can decide rationally what they
• E.g., Maxim: I ought to attend the lecture if I want and don’t.
want to pass my examination. -​ Persons are ends in themselves, they
Categorical imperative: have interests (their goals) that are
• What I ought to do unconditionally. important by virtue of their rational
E.g., Maxim: I ought not to murder no matter nature, they are value-givers and, as
what goal I have. persons, their own value is intrinsic.
Kant’s view: all moral imperatives are
categorical imperatives. They are universally Kingdom of Ends
valid and have equal forces to equally free -​ our moral obligation is to act only on
and rational agents. principles which could earn the
acceptance of a community of fully
THE UNIVERSAL LAW FORMULA rational agents each of whom has an
“I ought never act except in a way that I could equal share in legislating principles for
also will that my maxim should become a the community.
universal law.” (4:402) [ Also: “Act only in
accordance with that maxim through which
ETHICS - Midterms

The formulation of the CI states that we must Golden Rule vs Categorical Imperative
“act in accordance with the maxims of a
member giving universal laws for a merely
possible kingdom of ends” (4:439). It
combines the others in that:
●​ it requires that we conform our actions
to the maxims of a legislator of laws
●​ that this lawgiver lays down universal
laws, binding all rational wills including
our own,
●​ and that those laws are of ‘a merely Universal Maxim
possible kingdom’ each of whose ●​ The categorical imperative requires
members equally possesses this that any moral decision you make
status as legislator of universal laws, must be acceptable for everyone else
and hence must be treated always as to do too.
an end in itself. ●​ If so, your action is right.
●​ If your decision is not okay for
Autonomy everyone everywhere then it would be
The idea of the will of every rational being as wrong.
a will that legislates universal law.” (laws are
of our own making) The Doctrine of Informed Consent (The
-​ our status as free moral agents is the Nuremberg code): The voluntary consent of
source of our dignity and worth- we the human subject is absolutely essential.
are “moral beings above all.”
-​ “Choose only in such a way that the By saying that we respect persons as
maxims of your choice are also autonomous agents, we imply that they are
included as universal law in the same having equal statuses with us, that we cannot
volition.” treat them as a means only.
Using somebody implies an imbalanced
The Categorical Imperative and Cheating power structure, meaning that the users are
• in a higher rank;
• have more power;
• have ends in the action plan that the inferior
party cannot share.
ETHICS - Midterms

Duty (Kant’s Main Principle) ”what is right is what you feel you ought to
“What separates humans from non-humans is do” Ethical Theory- The intention of Kant’s
our ability to reason” morality is to set aside all ego-centredness,
Reason- enables us to act freely against our and move towards an unconditional and
instincts and desires if we so choose. universal sympathy.

Basic Kantian Themes GOOD WILL AND DUTY

●​ Personal autonomy- the moral person A good will is determined by moral demands-
is a rational self-legislator constrained to act in certain ways- according
●​ Respect- person should be treated as to duty.
an end, not a means
●​ Duty- moral action, we must do The Moral Worth
according to principle On Kant’s view, the moral worth of an
action is not determined by its
Contrasts in Kant consequences because:
●​ Morality, duty vs inclination 1. It is possible that someone does something
●​ Freedom, Autonomy vs Heteronomy out of evil intention, but ends up bringing
●​ Reason, Categorical vs Hypothetical good consequences to society.
Imperative 2. It is also possible that someone does
something out of good intention, but ends up
DUTY AND REASON bringing about bad consequences.
is not applicable in every situation 3. The consequences of an action are not
If we use consequences as the basis under our control.
of moral worth, sometimes lying is right 4. We can only control our motives when
because it makes a lot of people happy. But acting as a moral person.
the maxim that supports lying cannot pass 5. Therefore the moral worth of an action is
the ‘universality test’ and the ‘humanity test’. given by our good will.
-​ Lying is a contradiction of the
categorical imperative: it cannot be Only the final motive will count on Kant’s
universalized as it would render view. The right motive can be a motive out of
communicating, wanting to be either:
believed, meaningless. • self-interest,
-​ If everybody lies, then words lose its • sympathy (natural inclination), or
function to express truth. • a sense of duty (the voice of conscience).
-​ Lying is a contradiction of the
practical imperative: it is not treating Immanuel Kant’s FREEDOM
persons with respect; it is In Kant philosophy, Freedom is defined as a
manipulation. concept which is involved in the moral
-​ Lying can be successful only if we use domain.
other people’s ignorance. In this case Kant says that the moral law is only that I
we are treating them only as a means know myself as a free person.
to our ends.
ETHICS - Midterms

Kantian freedom - is closely linked to the According to Kant, this is just common
notion of autonomy, which means sense.
-​ law itself. -​ On these grounds, Kant rejects a type
-​ freedom falls obedience to a law that I of compatibilism, -“comparative
created myself. concept of freedom”
-​ It is therefore respect its commitment
to compliance with oneself. Compatibilist view according to Kant
Autonomy -​ I am free whenever the cause of my
-​ literally means giving the law to action is within me. So I am unfree
oneself, and on Kant’s view our only when something external to me
understanding provides laws that pushes or moves me, but I am free
constitute the a prior framework of our whenever the proximate cause of my
experience. body’s movement is internal to me as
an “acting being” (5:96).
Practical Reason and Freedom
Practical reason legislates INVOLUNTARY CONVULSIONS AND
-​ (makes laws and requirements) of VOLUNTARY BODILY MOVEMENTS
free beings, or more precisely the Free actions= voluntary bodily movements.
causality of free beings. - This view, he says, assimilates human
-​ practical reason is based on freedom, freedom to “the freedom of a
it is freedom. turnspit,”
- or a projectile in flight,
Freedom - or the motion of a clock’s hands
-​ we are free in the sense that we have (5:96–97).
the ability to do otherwise. - The proximate causes of these
movements are internal to the
in order for this man’s action to be morally turnspit, the projectile, and the clock
wrong: at the time of the movement. This
-​ it must have been within his control cannot be sufficient for moral
-​ it was within his power at the time not responsibility.
to have committed the theft. Compatibilist
- would say that the thief’s action is free
If this was not within his control at the time because its proximate cause is inside
-​ It nevertheless would not be correct to him, and because the theft was not
say that his action was morally wrong.
an involuntary convulsion but a
voluntary action. The thief decided
Moral rightness and wrongness
-​ apply only to free agents who to commit the theft, and his action
control their actions and have it in flowed from this decision.
their power, at the time of their According to Kant
actions, either to act rightly or not. - if the thief’s decision is a natural
phenomenon that occurs in time,
ETHICS - Midterms

then it must be the effect of some - The real issue is not whether the
cause that occurred in a previous cause of my action is internal or
external to me, but whether IT IS IN
time.
MY CONTROL NOW.
- For Kant, however, the cause of my
THE CATEGORY OF CAUSE AND EFFECT action can be within my control now
Every event has a cause that begins in an only if it is not in time.
earlier time. If that cause too was an event
occurring in time, then it must also have a transcendental idealism
cause beginning in a still earlier time, etc. - the only way to make sense of the kind
of freedom that morality requires.
TIME - for Kant it is the root of the problem Phenomena
Again, if the thief’s choice to commit - in the Kantian thought, are subject to
the theft is a natural event in time, then it is the law of natural causality: each
the effect of a causal chain extending into event is the effect of another, and so
the distant past. But the past is out of his on to infinity.

control now, in the present. Once the past is Kant Ethics

past, he can’t change it. - mainly based on the concept of free

will and autonomy
So if the thief’s choice to commit the
- For transcendental idealism allows
theft is a natural event in time, then it is not
that the cause of my action may be a
now and never was in his control, and he
thing in itself outside of time: namely,
could not have done otherwise than to
commit the theft. In that case, it would be a
MY NOUMENAL SELF
mistake to hold him morally responsible
- which is free because it is not part of
for it.
nature.
- is an uncaused cause outside of time,
Compatibilism which therefore is not subject to the
- as Kant understands it, therefore deterministic laws of nature in
locates the issue in the wrong accordance with which our
place. Even if the cause of my action understanding constructs experience.
is internal to me, if it is in the past – Two Worlds Seen from a Scientific Point of
for example, if my action today is View, Noumena, Plato, Reality Itself
determined by a decision I made
● Completely Knowable
yesterday, or from the character I
● Perfect in Itself
developed in childhood – then it is
● Unchanging
not within my control now.
● Timeless
ETHICS - Midterms

● Invisible capacities and habits acquired by a

Kant Reality “as it is in itself” person as a member of society
● Absolutely Unknowable - is rooted from the collective “human
● Possibly a realm of free actions experience”.
● Non-sensible - always transmitted, shared or acquired
Phenomena, Plato - The Appearance of through learning.
Reality - satisfies human needs as a social
● Partially Knowable being.
● Imperfect - tends towards the participation of the
● Changing members of the society
● Temporal - Culture imprints the existing moral
● Visible principles into its members, thus,
Kant, The “Mere Appearance” of Reality shapes the character of its

● Perfectly Knowable members as well..

● Here Newton’s physics is true.

● Actions and choices completely Human Culture
determined by physical causes and - the things a member of the society
laws. must do, what to do and how to do
● Sensible things.
- teaches and conditions members on
CULTURE AND MORAL DEVELOPMENT how to relate and live with the other

Culture is… the customary beliefs, social members of the society and even to
people outside of their own culture
forms, and material traits of a racial, religious,
or social group. The characteristic features of
Moral development
everyday existence (such as diversions or a
- refers to the “process through which a
way of life) shared by people in a place or
human person gains his or her
time
beliefs, skills and dispositions that
makes him or her morally mature
Culture
person.”
- is the integrated pattern of human
- it focuses on the acquisition,
knowledge, beliefs and behaviours.
understanding and most probably of
This consists of language, ideas,
changing the principles of morality of
customs, morals, laws, taboos,
a person from infancy to adulthood
institutions, tools, techniques, and
- fundamentally rooted in the very
works of art, rituals and other
experience of a person, in his or her
ETHICS - Midterms

relationship with others in the person and in moral development

community. particularly
● Furthermore, as one would look at it,
Culture is always social and communal by
culture has a tight grip on the moral
which the relationship of the people towards
development of the people.
one another and their experience as a people
● Culture is the conditioning principle of
are the culture’s meadow
the moral development of its
❑ Relationship and communal members
experience = culture influences the ● Nevertheless, culture as the principle
moral development of its members. that surrounds the moral
❑ Morality as principle is promoted development of the people may not
because primarily of the relationship alwayspromote what is good and
within the community. just for all.
● Laws and rules and standards of ● It is certain that sometimes there are
attitudes and behaviours are set and principles, attitudes and behaviours
promulgated by the community to that actually hinder good
promote that relationship that binds relationships and violate the welfare
them together as a people. of the others.
● Culture as it is being handed down ● These are indeed difficult to eliminate
from one generation to another forms immediately in a culture, yet, they
as well the morality of that particular should be subject to people’s
generation. discernment that proper changes and
● The culture defines the normative modifications have to be done for the
principles and behaviours of the sake of the welfare and justice for
society. everybody.
● It defines which particular principle
and behaviour that should be kept
Cultural Relativism
that would serve the best interest of
- Cultural relativism is the view that
the community. There would be a
ethical and social standards reflect
definition on what are the principles
the cultural context from which they
and behaviours also that should not
are derived.
be promoted or rejected. This kind of
- uphold that cultures differ
influence of culture in moral
fundamentally from one another, and
development is best seen in terms of
so do the moral frameworks that
relational level.
structure relations within different
● Evidently, culture is very significant in
societies.
the development of the human
ETHICS - Midterms

- The idea of universal truth in ethics is The Challenge of Cultural Relativism

a myth By: James Rachels and Stuart Rachels
- The customs of different societies are 1. Different societies have different
all that exist. moral codes.
- To say that a custom is ‘correct’ or ☞ True, but some values are
shared by all cultures.
‘incorrect’ would imply that we can
2. The moral code of a society
judge that custom by some determines what is right or wrong
independent standard of right and within that society.
wrong, but no such standard exists. ☞ This is closely tied to what
people believe to be right;
however, the code and the
Cultural relativism vs. Ethical relativism
people can be in error.
Cultural relativism 3. There are no moral truths that hold
- there are differences and norms from for all people at all times.
among cultures ☞ In order to criticize other
cultures, however, we can
Ethical relativism
appeal to broad principles.
- there is no objective standard or test 4. The moral code of our own society
among the moral standards among has no special status; it is but one
cultures. There are no universal or among many.
objective standards of conduct. - True, but one moral code might be

Rachels: cultural relativism = ethical better or worse than others

5. It is arrogant for us to judge other
relativism
cultures. We should always be
Cultural relativists claim the following: tolerant of them.
1. Different societies have different ☞ We shouldn’t tolerate
moral codes. everything. Human societies
2. The moral code of a society have done terrible things, and
determines what is right or wrong we can acknowledge moral
within that society. progress.
3. There are no moral truths that hold
for all people at all times. What Follows If Cultural Relativism Is True?
4. The moral code of our own society
1. We could no longer honestly say that
has no special status; it is but one
among many. the customs of other societies are
5. It is arrogant for us to judge other morally inferior to our own.
cultures. We should always be 2. We could no longer justifiably criticize
tolerant of them. the code of our own society
3. The idea of moral progress is called
into doubt.
ETHICS - Midterms

Why There Is Less Disagreement Than It brought to bear in judging the

Seems practices of any culture, at any time,
▪ The difference is in our belief systems, including our own
not in our values.
▪ We cannot conclude that, because our What We Can Learn from Cultural Relativism
customs differ, our values differ.
- rightly warns us about the danger of
▪ The difference in customs may be due
to something else. assuming that all our preferences are
based on some absolute rational
Consider Eskimo infanticide standard.
☞ Even in the best of times, a mother - keep an open mind regarding the
could sustain very few children. practices of both our culture and the
☞ As hunters (primary food providers), cultures of other societies.
male children were favored, and - These are important points, but we
hunters suffered a higher casualty can accept them without accepting
rate. the whole theory.
☞ Were it not for female infanticide,
there would be approximately UNIVERSAL VALUES
one-and-a-half times as many How all Cultures have some Values in
females in the average Eskimo local common
group as there are food-producing 1. Care for Infants
males. - concludes that the young in a society
☞ Life forced choices upon them that must be cared for or the society will
we do not have to make. die out, possibly a universal truth
- Any culture that continues to exist
Judging a Cultural Practice to Be Undesirable must care for its young. Infants who
Is There a Culture-Independent Standard are not cared for must be the
of Right and Wrong? exception rather than the rule.
- This is a standard that might 2. Universal Truth
reasonably be used in thinking about Gives the example of the necessity of
any social practice: truthfulness in a society and the potential for
Does the practice promote or hinder the exceptions
welfare of the people affected by it? - Every society must also value
- This looks like just the sort of truthfulness.
independent moral standard that 3. Prohibition against killing
cultural relativism says cannot exist.
It is a single standard that may be
ETHICS - Midterms

-Give example involving murder.people would

always be on guard, on a large scale the
society could collapse
People would create smaller groups for
protection thus, assuming a smaller society
with rules against murder“
- Some prohibition against murder is
also a necessary feature of any
society if it is to persist

There are some moral rules that all societies

will have in common, because those rules
arenecessary for the society to exist”