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

Explain what Kant meant by the Categorical Imperative.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

a) Explain what Kant meant by the Categorical Imperative (33 marks) The categorical imperative is an unconditional command, which, for Kant, told us what our duties were. This is a deontological theory, which means it points to the actions that are good in themselves and pursue the ultimate aim of reaching supreme good, while also telling us which actions are forbidden. This theory is based on duty. To act morally is to do one's duty, and one's duty is to obey the moral law. This theory distinguishes between duty and inclination and accepts that if something can't be done, then there is no guilt. They make no reference to desires or needs. He believed that the only way we can make selfless, rational moral decisions is by acting out of a sense of duty. Kant believed that if we 'ought' to do something, then it implied that we 'could' do it. It lets everyone know their duty in a situation. This view stands in opposition to teleological views such as utilitarianism, which if something is right or wrong is dependant on the consequences of the action. ...read more.

Middle

This theory puts together a powerful set of moral principles. b) Assess critically Kant's claims about the Categorical Imperative (17 marks) Kant believes that one of the most important features of the categorical imperative is its universalisability, that my maxim should become a universal law. Thus we recognise that there are moral dilemmas that may be similar but different. Are all killings the same? Some can be justified, others cannot. Is this a weakness in Kant's theory? Kant would say that it is dependant on the reason, not the outcome and for that reason; he is not categorising all killings as the same moral problem. Humans should not be treated as means to an end; they should be treated as ends in themselves. Humans are the highest point of creation and therefore need to be treated uniquely. Unlike utilitarianism, using the Categorical Imperative, you cannot sacrifice one for the greater good of the greater number. Happiness should only be sought if it doesn't prevent another's happiness. But difficult decisions do have to be made, and Kant's approach is not best suited to deciding upon the answers to some questions. ...read more.

Conclusion

Kant also argued that the categorical imperative that allows one to determine what actually is moral is known as a priori, meaning that you don't obtain morals through observations, but by only reason. And in order to gain a full overview, he should look at the consequences too, otherwise you are unable to get a complete picture of the situation. This theory could encourage someone to become selfish and choose a duty that benefits them in the long run. If you don't consider obtaining morals through both observation and reasoning, you are therefore unlikely to recognise what is right and wrong. The categorical imperative sometimes seems to give false negatives in terms of what is permitted behaviour. For example, I cannot will that everyone in the world should eat in my favourite restaurant. Perhaps this sort of problem can be avoided by being careful in the use of relative terms like my. In this case, it is possible to will that everyone should eat in their favourite restaurant. The real flaw in this argument is that it doesn't allow emotional free will. This strikes me as a fundamental dilemma, which doesn't make the argument appeal to me. I also think that we shouldn't dismiss individuals for the sake of helping the majority. 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 Practical Questions 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 Practical Questions essays

  1. Compare Utilitarianism With Kant's Theory of The Categorical Imperative And Explain Which You Think ...

    Kant's theory of the Categorical Imperative contrasts greatly to the principle of Utilitarianism - with Utilitarianism you act in such a way that will bring about the greatest good for the greatest number, whereas, with the Categorical Imperative, you are intended to act a certain way because it is your duty to do so.

  2. Evaluate Korsgaard's discussion of the Universalizability Argument. In what ways does she conform with ...

    The problem of moral law is resolved by the idea of moral identity and obligation. The reflective structure of human identity presupposes that a person identifies himself with some law or principle which will govern his choices and reasons. It requires him to be a law to himself.

  1. Free essay

    Explain the categorical Imperative as a tool for moral decision making

    The second maxim is that every human being must be treated as an end, rather than a means as an end, what this basically means is that you're never allowed to manipulate anyone no matter what. Kant thought that each person is their own rational agent and no one person may be manipulated to achieve the goals of another.

  2. Examine what is meant by natural law with reference to morality and analyse and ...

    the final cause. "A Good knife is one which cuts well". Christian philosophers readily adapted and developed Stoic natural law theory, identifying natural law with the law of God. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1275), a Dominican Priest and an important Christian philosopher and theologian, believed that natural law was the reason of divine wisdom.

  1. A. Explain what Kant meant by the categorical argument. B. Asses Kant's claims critically ...

    for the 'moral' way to behave in any situation The will Kant says, is the movement of acting according to a law. When we act, whether or not we achieve what we intend with our action is often beyond our control and the morality of our actions cannot depend on their outcome.

  2. Kant and the Categorical Imperative

    Kant called these rules of what was morally good or bad the Categorical Imperative and stated that everyone has a duty to carry these categorical imperatives out. The statement 'duty should be done simply because it is duty' means that Duty should be done for the sake of duty and

  1. Does Kant's account of categorical imperatives and universal laws elucidate ordinary criteria for judging ...

    All good attributes require good intentions or else they may serve evil ends. The consequences of an action are irrelevant to assessments of moral worth, according to Kant, though they are, of course, relevant to most other aspects of life.

  2. Kant and the categorical imperative

    Kant never believed in breaking the rules even if by doing so, someone would benefit. For example, to tell your sister that she looks good in a dress - which does not in fact suit her - just to make her feel better about herself, would be lying, however good the motive behind it.

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