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

Kant and the categorical imperative

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

KANT & THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE: MODEL ESSAY 1 (a) "Duty should be done, simply because it is duty." Explain how Kant analysed this concept. (33 marks) (b) "Categorical Imperatives allow no room for compassion in the treatment of women wanting abortions." Discuss. (17 marks) (Part A): Kant tried to develop a theory of ethics which relied on reason rather than emotion. While he was not anti-religious, he wanted an ethical system which was not clouded by religion, emotion or personal interpretation. He placed emphasis on motives behind an action rather than, like the Utilitarians, the consequences of an action. He believed that consequences were no guide to whether an action was moral or not. His theory is known as deontological, or duty-based, where ends can never justify the means. He believed that there were general rules which must be adhered to in every circumstance. He called these absolute rules of what is good or bad 'Categorical imperatives'. These rules were rationally determinable. Individuals must never be reduced to the level that they are a convenience for the happiness of someone else. ...read more.

Middle

Not lying, to Kant, is an absolute imperative and he uses a priori reasoning to come to this conclusion. These moral rules are as reliable as mathematical proofs because they derive from first principles. Only free agents (people thinking for themselves and making their own decisions) can make moral decisions. There must be an element of choice - the choice to do good or bad. He assumed that we are all free agents. An action can only possess moral value when it is done for is own sake, for duty's sake, and not for the pleasure of the individual or in the hope of gaining specific outcomes. (Part B): Taken at face value, one could argue that "Categorical Imperatives allow no room for compassion in the treatment of women wanting abortions." This is because categorical imperatives are absolute rules which cannot be altered to suit an individual. To Kant, murder is always wrong and this would be the categorical imperative. Kant would have to be persuaded that this categorical imperative cannot be said to cover every abortion. ...read more.

Conclusion

If the moral rule - to end one life to save another, for example - can be universalised then compassion can be shown in the treatment of women who want abortions. If it is decided that when the mother's life is at risk abortion is allowed, it could be said that this is a principle everyone should practise if faced with this situation. It should be weighed up whether the best outcome would be achieved and whether it be the best rule if it became a general rule. If, in the case of abortion, the mother's life is saved, then this could become the general rule. An exception is not being made or an individual being given precedence over the categorical imperative, the categorical imperative itself has been re-evaluated. The scope of the categorical imperative has been narrowed. The universal, right thing to do is to kill the unborn child because it threatens the life of the mother. Compassion has been achieved although it is incidental; it does not make the action any more moral from the deontological point of view. Thus, the categorical imperative might allow abortion in some cases, but it takes no account of compassion. Andrew Bunce ...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 ...

    He makes a distinction between duty and inclination - we may be inclined to act out of personal preference, but morality is universal. Also, Kant's theory is fair and treats all individuals equally - promoting an equal society - as no one person can be valued above the rest.

  2. Explain Kant's Categorical Imperative.

    If this were carried out, society today would become unbearable. > The Categorical imperative is morally unacceptable. Discuss! There are a number of moral dilemmas in today's world, however, the most applicable and useful for our purpose it could be argued.

  1. RE euthanasia for and against

    By not allowing euthanasia, this problem is eradicated. Elderly relatives could think that they are being a harsh load on their families and want to take some weight off their shoulders. They could choose death as an option and choose euthanasia.

  2. The use of the Categorical Imperative makes no room for compassionate treatment of women ...

    The unborn, potential human would not be allowed to be used as a means to an end, and would have to be treated as an end in itself. The mother could not use the unborn baby growing inside her as a means to an end (by freeing herself of it),

  1. People should always do their duty. Explain how Kant understood this concept.

    Nevertheless, it is our duty to try to abide universal laws and rules. We should not use our emotion in our actions, as that clouds our judgements and leads us to the wrong decisions. It is perfectly acceptable to show emotion, but we must not use this to make our decisions.

  2. is abortion justified to save the mother's life

    argument, in that a baby should not be born into ominous circumstances, it's quality of life should be utmost. Finally many look towards the issue of personhood when contemplating abortion. Central to the question of abortion is whether or not the embryo counts as a 'person', and people have differing viewpoints on the matter.

  1. Reason and Emotion

    It is the situation that causes the emotions. If a friend has done something terribly wrong and the right thing would be to turn him or her in you will have a moral dilemma. Reason would dictate the principle of utilitarianism, where the good of many outweigh the good of few.

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

    What we can control however is the will behind these actions. That is we can will to act according to one law rather than another. The morality of an action therefore, must be assessed in terms of the motivation behind it and not the consequences associated with it.

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