Kantian ethics, based on Immanuel Kant’s theories, holds that certain principles are inherently moral and must be observed in all situations. The will of the person, not consequences, makes an action moral. Critics argue that it oversimplifies ethical decisions and excludes human emotions. Kant’s theory of categorical imperatives is utopian and cannot be fully realized in a complex society. People have intrinsic value and should not be used as a means to an end.
Kantian ethics is based on the theories of morality of Immanuel Kant, an 18th century philosopher. The ethical system devised by Kant remains influential to this day, although it is far from universally accepted. Kantian ethics contain several fundamental principles, although his work mainly boils down to the idea that certain principles are inherently moral and that a moral person or society must observe these categorical imperatives in all situations. Critics tend to suggest that Kantian ethics oversimplify ethical decisions and suggest that the exclusion of all human emotions in favor of rational observance of certain principles is neither possible nor desirable.
One of the main tenets of Kantian ethics is the idea that it is the will of the person, not necessarily the consequences, that makes an action moral or otherwise. If a person does something out of a sense of duty to the moral law, then his actions have moral value. According to Kant, this means that if a person takes care of his child believing that taking care of children is an important duty, he acts ethically. If, however, a person takes care of a child simply because she loves him, this action is out of inclination rather than duty and has no actual moral value.
How someone can know what the moral law is, according to Kant, requires testing a principle against a system to see if it holds up. An example of a principle, known by Kant as a maxim, might be that if Joe is poor, Joe will rob someone else to get money. To test this maxim for morality, it must first be generalized, as in: every person who is poor should rob someone else to get money. Kantian ethics argue that this maxim falls apart at this point, because if everyone were caught up in rampant robbery, the idea of personal property would dissolve, which in turn would mean that theft would be impossible as no one would really own anything. . If a maxim fails the generalization test, then it cannot be used as a categorical imperative or intrinsic moral law and should not be used.
If a maxim withstands the generalization test, it can still fail the second test, which asks whether a person will or will want the generalization to be a fact. The famous example used by Kant to explain this concept is called the bad Samaritan argument, which suggests that while a society would be possible in which no one would help a neighbor in dire straits, most people would not accept that situation, because there would be no no one to help them if they were in extreme difficulty. According to Kantian ethics, maxims that one would not like to be universal should not be followed.
Criticism of Kant’s principle of categorical imperatives usually goes against the idea that a moral law must be universal and allow for no exceptions. For example, Kant claims that murder is universally wrong. Critics argue that this principle therefore suggests that a person should allow his wife to be beaten and raped rather than kill her attacker. Kant’s theory of imperatives, although quite rational, appears to be a utopian concept which cannot be fully realized in a complex society.
A second fundamental principle of Kantian ethics suggests that people have intrinsic value and should not be used or treated as a means to an end. While this theory may seem patently obvious today, it certainly wasn’t in the 18th century. Kant emphasized the rationality of other human beings, which was a revolutionary concept in a world that practiced slavery, repressed minorities and guarded against women’s rights.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
