• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Explain The Difference Between Hypothetical And Categorical Imperatives

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

(a): Explain the difference between hypothetical and categorical imperatives (25 marks) Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804) believed that an objective moral code for right and wrong existed. He devised an ethical theory, aptly called Kantian Ethics, which is a deontological theory of ethics. This is due to it being based on the actions that people carry out, not any good or bad consequences that may or may not arise from the situation. Kant was also highly distrustful of experience and seemingly "empirical" knowledge that came from our senses as this was, in Kantian terms, from the phenomenal world, thus meaning that it is subjective to our sense, and to gain true objectivity, we needed to gain knowledge of a world that our minds have no direct access to; the noumenal world, or the real world. As we do not have direct access to this, we must use something that everyone has access to: reason. ...read more.

Middle

Morality must, therefore, be a specific set of categorical imperatives. Kant also believed that an action must not only be done that is good, but it also has to be done for the sake of doing it, not as a means to an end. However, although both the hypothetical and categorical imperative are commands, they have very little in common besides this. In fact, they are very, very different. The categorical imperative is a conditional command which is willed as an end in itself. A hypothetical imperative, on the other hand, is a conditional command that is willed as a means to an end. A hypothetical good is an instrumental good, whereas a categorical imperative is an intrinsic good, something which is good in itself. In terms of reason, something which Kant believed was of upmost importance, the commands also vary greatly. A categorical imperative is based on a priori knowledge; reason and logic are used to determine what is and what isn't an universalisable moral law or command. ...read more.

Conclusion

The second formulation is that you should always treat people as ends in themselves, and never as means to an end - you should never use another person as a way of getting to something else. Kant called this Formula of End in Itself. The third and final formulation is the Formula of a Kingdom of Ends. This is the idea that everyone should act as though everyone they treat is an end not just a means to an end, not just the individual. The hypothetical imperative and categorical imperative have some obvious and very great differences, from being conditional and unconditional, being a priori and a posteriori and from being dismissed by Kant and being developed by him into three formulations. However, the main difference between them is the context with which they're used: the categorical imperative is used to formulate absolute moral commands, whereas the hypothetical imperative doesn't. Actions carried out using the categorical imperative are done for the sake of one's duty and this is what makes an action moral. ?? ?? ?? ?? Page | 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Philosophy essays

  1. Nietzsche and Mill on Conventional Morality

    The difference clearly lies in the differences in opinion that the two philosophers held before making their assessments, their prejudices as Nietzsche would put it. In addition we have seen that even in today's society, which would usually be regarded far more utilitarian than Nietzschian, the argument can be made the other way.

  2. Explain what Kant meant by 'the Categorical Imperative'

    must motivate our actions, as well as justify them. This is because without rationality in the decision making process it would be impossible to say that the consequential action was a rational one. Again, this creates a problem because it is difficult to argue that a motivation is rational and not one done due to emotion or passion because

  1. Which of Kant's formulations of the categorical imperative offers the most plausible account of ...

    Kant gives examples of both kinds: i.: A person proposes to make a promise he doesn't intend to keep to pay back money in order to meet a need of his own. He must consider whether he could will a world in which everyone is motivated in precisely the same way.

  2. Explain Kants Categorical Imperative (25 marks)

    If not, then what you are thinking of doing is wrong because it is against reason. An example of this that Kant used is promise-keeping. Sometimes we break promises because it is easier to break a promise than keep it.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work