Universal Law Calls for the Dismissal of Politics: An Analysis of Kant's Philosophy on the Morals And It's Correlation to his Political Theories

Universal Law Calls for the Dismissal of Politics:

An Analysis of Kant’s Philosophy on the Morals

And It’s Correlation to his Political Theories

It is difficult to address any study of ethical behavior without discussing the philosophical work of Immanuel Kant. Born during the Renaissance in Germany, Kant is one of the most important philosophers in the realm of political and moral thinking. Kant addresses morality through the understanding and explanation of autonomy. In The Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant defines a concept of universal morals he calls the "categorical imperative". He positions his thoughts and ideas within the parameters of the rights and duties intrinsic to the autonomy of man. To do this, Kant makes a distinction between will and free choice. Autonomy allows the adherence of free will, whereas will provides the choice of the individual to act in ways which conform to the maxims of a society. Kant’s theory of universal duties, which remain constant regardless of a person’s subjective imperatives that seek to satisfy their own inclinations instead of these universal duties, has had a vital impact on the ways in which western societies reason concerning moral and ethical standards.

Throughout most of recorded history, certain patterns remained constant: religion and politics were in some way fused together; few philosophers concerned themselves with the thought that the nature of man does not include war; and finally, even fewer academics maintained that political affairs of the state were not a necessity for survival. Kant addressed all three of these complex and controversial issues with the idea of a Universal Law, which connected his moral theories to his political ones.

Immanuel Kant was born in Königsberg, Germany, on April 22, 1724. He began his college education at Fredericaianum College, studying the classics, but later developed an obsession for mathematics and physics, which he studied at the University of Königsberg. After he acquired his doctorate, he became a professor at the university, where he taught science and mathematics for fifteen years. However, as his career developed, he acquired a desire to learn and teach philosophy. In 1770, at the university, he became professor of metaphysics and logic. Kant retired in 1796, after twenty-seven years of teaching.

Although his theories and ideas were popular and admired when he was alive, Kant has had a much larger impact on current philosophical principles. All his works, including: "Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics", "The Metaphysics of Ethics", "Critique of Practical Reason", "Critique of Judgment, and Religion Within the Boundaries of Pure Reason", "General Natural History", "Metaphysical Rudiments of Natural Philosophy", and "Theory of the Heavens" were published, which led the way towards global philosophical recognition. Immanuel Kant, at the age of eighty, died on February 12, 1804.

According to Kant, moral law is an issue of obligation and is based on the doctrine of universality. A moral obligation must be universal; that is, applicable to all individuals at all times, in all situations. A system of morality, according to Kant, must be able to give a solid moral path, not considering specific circumstances, and must be rationally acceptable and accessible to all.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Within the theoretical context of autonomy, the essence of choice is epitomized by free will. Kant writes in The Metaphysics of Morals, "the act of free choice in general" is considered the highest concept in the metaphysics of morals (p. 46n). Moral law cannot result from ends based upon human tendency; it is a law to be employed to such ends or, in the words of Kant, to the "maxims of choice." The manifestation of this application of the moral law generates Kant’s metaphysics of morals. M.D. Aeschliman, in an article discussing Stanley L. Jaki’s novel, Angels, Apes, and Men, wrote that, "Both parts of The Metaphysics of Morals are thus devoted to articulating the way in which the application of the moral law to the capacity of choice secures the freedom to exercise that capacity: the "outer" freedom from compulsions by others and the "inner" freedom from one's inclinations" (Aeschliman 48). Aeschliman considers that the Metaphysics of Morals that there are two components of freedom, both of which are concerned with the human aptitude of choice.

The more conventional view of morals and ethics has to do with human actions and how they are perceived as moral judgments. An act is evaluated by its results; for example, hedonism, where an action is evaluated to be good or bad depending on if it yielded pleasure and happiness. This is not the basis of Kantian philosophy. According to Kant, moral laws are autonomous to individuals. Thus, each person is capable of determining the difference that separates just and unjust actions. A central component of Kant’s theory concerning morality is deontology, or duty-based ethics. Kant said, “An action done from duty must be wholly exclude the influence of inclination”. Therefore, obeying moral laws also must be done without regard to ones inclinations or consequences. Kant said, “to deviate from the principle of duty is beyond all doubt wicked”. Duty is the rationale for obedience, not consequences. Kant's ideas concerning the 'categorical imperative' in relation to the traditional rigorism school of thought is relevant to this distinction as well.

Traditional rigorism is a school of thought within philosophy that relates to the will, rather than the act, and critics an act by the motive of the person. Consequences are often beyond the jurisdiction of the individual. However, the intent behind the action can be evaluated in terms of the individual and, thus, can be judged. Kant's philosophies are deeply rooted in the rigorism point of view. His ideas pertaining to autonomy and universality form the foundation for the theories surrounding rigorism. The stress is on the “dutiful spirit in any actions rather than on actions that fulfill certain duties.” What matters in the creation of a criterion of morality is not the toleration of the law, but the true respect for the necessity for the law. Conformity is not seen as the unthinking adherence to the law but the belief that the laws are by consensual agreement and adherence is by choice. True morality exhibits an important agreement of an individual and his acts.

Kant stresses the different categories of duties, justice, and virtue in terms of "impossible to conceive" and "impossible to will." He observes that while it is not possible to visualize a world where maxims of unjust actions are universal laws, "it is possible that a universal law of nature could subsist in harmony with this maxim” (Grounding 91). The need to test the maxims of society is indisputable if the goal is the functioning of a just society within the framework of the categorical imperative.

The discussion that sets science and religion at odds has been occupying philosophers since before the time of Galileo. According to Aeschliman, the "tendency to exalt a partial truth or insight into an exhaustive, exclusive explanatory principle is a permanent intellectual temptation, surrender to which always does violence to truth. In the past the chief culprit was often religion; today it is usually science" (Aeschliman 47). There are portions of this line of reasoning that can be better understood through the classifications defined by Kant as will and free choice. They, in turn, are the foundation for his ideas of autonomy. The 'categorical imperative' provides the only moral motive that allows man to act out of respect for the universal moral law. The importance of the human individual is the groundwork of Kant’s definition of ethical behavior, and the core of his moral judgment.

The universal law of freedom is the first moral necessity and the essence of the categorical imperative. The first moral necessity, according to Kant, it to, “Act only according to that maxim by which you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law". It is the only right that Kant recognizes as intrinsic. Acting autonomously, as Kant says, is "the possession of the self-control to limit one's moral decisions to purely rational decision making, ignoring the temporary coercion of inclination in favor of the permanent principles of a priori rationality. If you choose to act in a manner that goes against a priori rationality, you can justifiably be coerced into acting in accordance with those moral laws" (West kant-essay.html). Though he increases the theory to include respect for individuals and then integrates both views in a third concept, the 'kingdom of ends', the first formulation is considered the universal law of freedom and makes up a fundamental component of the categorical imperative.

The second stage of the theory of the categorical imperative includes moral duty in acting toward humanity as an end and not simply as a means. In Kant’s words, “Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person, or that of another, as an end and never as a means only." Respect is shown by "giving due consideration to their possible maxims, and innate dignity" (West kant-essay.html). The rational nature of man is defined within the existence of man in his community. Individual actions are essentially involved in the subjective, or personal understanding of the rational nature. However, each individual owns a subjective reality, and the morality of universality insists that all individuals have the same rational potential as every other, and must be treated with the respect. “Morality”, according to Kant, “demands that we derive from our own self-interest a generalized concern for all human beings. If I treat another person with anything less than the dignity due to a rational moral agent, I deny that individual their basic humanity. People, therefore, are not merely things to be used to reach one's goal, but instead sentient beings with worth beyond measure" (West kant-essay.html).

The third level of the categorical imperative relates to applying the universal law of freedom and the basic worth of man’s principle toward the establishment of the community. People handle the concepts within the categorical imperative by creating maxims by which to set their boundaries of behavior. Maxims, theorized by Kant, are the standards by which behaviors are compared. Maxims are the essence of moral behavior, the "should" that allows the setting of goals. Maxims are the moral laws of a righteous society.

While Kant has indeed influenced modern western thought on moral and ethical absolutism, some theorists find certain faults and criticisms within Kant's moral system. First, some philosophers have identified the basic problem with Kant's system is that it neglects to identify or, rather, to justify the existence of moral law. Jesus Christ, who is alleged to be the only Son of God by one of the most extensive religions in the world, Christianity, has made one of the largest contributions towards the principle of morality. In Christ’s teachings, moral acts are in juxtaposition with the Word of the Lord. An act is considered to be moral if it adheres to the wisdom and traditions of Christ. This, whether correct or not, is one form of justification for the existence of a moral law. Within Kant’s system, there is no justification.

The second basic problem with Kantian thought, according to some philosophers, is that Kant's theories neglect the value of nature. Essentially, since Kant's system treats people as “ends-in-themselves”, the possibility of abusing nature may be abandoned. These philosophers argue that what Kantians might not consider valuable, such as animal rights and environmental issues, are in fact important, and would be neglected by Kant’s system because they are not rational beings.

Finally, some philosophers have endeavored to bring the impact of consequences back into the moral system. They assert that consequences cannot be overlooked despite Kantian ethics. What if two moral principles conflict? Some would declare that the answer could only be formed once the consequence of each principle is considered.