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

What does Kant mean when he says that an action has moral worth only if it is done 'from the motive of duty'? Is he right?

Extracts from this document...


What does Kant mean when he says that an action has moral worth only if it is done 'from the motive of duty'? Is he right? A person's actions are right or wrong, a person is morally worthy or lacks moral worth (i.e., is morally base). A person's actions determine her moral worth, but there is more to this than merely seeing if the actions are right or wrong. All the things we do can be divided into those things which are voluntary actions, and those that are mere behaviour (e.g., knee jerk reflexes). Of course there is no moral worth based on mere behaviours. All voluntary actions can be divided into those that are contrary to duty and those which are not contrary to duty. Kant claims that this distinction is based on the categorical imperative. Clearly, no moral worth is attained by doing actions that are contrary to duty. All those action that are not contrary to duty can be divided again into those action which are required by duty and those actions which are not required by duty. Actions that are required by duty are things like keeping promises, paying debts, and other things that we commonly consider to be our duties. ...read more.


Kant would argue that based on these actions both drunks are equally bad, and the fact that one person got lucky does not make them any better than the other drunk. After all, they both made the same choices, and nothing within either one's control had anything to do with the difference in their actions. The same reasoning applies to people who act for the right reasons. If both people act for the right reasons, then both are morally worthy, even if the actions of one of them happen to lead to bad consequences by bad luck. There is a further intuitive appeal of this theory, it has the advantage that a person is totally in control of whether they are a good person. A person does not have to be in a position of power and be able to bring about good consequences in order to be a good person, all that they need to do is to act for the right reasons. This makes Kant's theory fairly egalitarian. It also explains how people with greatly differing moral opinions can still have respect for each other as people. It is not just selfishness that is ruled out by Kant's theory, but any motive at all other than morality. ...read more.


There is also a tendency to think that Kant says it is always wrong to do something that just causes your own happiness, like buying an ice cream cone. This also I believe to be false. Kant thinks that you ought to do things to make yourself happy as long as you make sure that they are not immoral (i.e., contrary to duty), and that you would refrain from doing them if they were immoral. Getting ice cream is not immoral, and so you can go ahead and do it. Doing it will not make you a morally worthy person, but it won't make you a bad person either. Many actions that are permissible but not required by duty are neutral in this way. Therefore according to Kant a good person is someone who always does their duty because it is their duty. It is fine if they enjoy doing it, but it must be the case that they would do it even if they did not enjoy it. It seems to me that Kants argument is strong and that he is correct in the idea that moral worth only comes from the sense of duty. Alex O'Cinneide 27th March 2004 PH416 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Religion in Society 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 University Degree Religion in Society essays

  1. Can we Predict Moral Behaviour? It is Kohlberg's stage theory of moral development which ...

    A substantial number of students who were assessed at Kohlbergs levels one and two protested for their own rights. Yet, for the majority, their thinking was more strongly post conventional than a sample of matched non-participants. This shows that those judged as highly moral could be predicted to act in

  2. Do we have the right to die?

    On the other hand those that there is active intervention in the euthanasia. In the first cases the extenuating circumstances should be acknowledged. The Netherlands is the first country that legalized euthanasia. The parliament validated with 104 votes for and 40 against, a statute that allows the medics to help their patients die.

  1. The entry sets out five individually necessary conditions for anyone to be a candidate ...

    if someone's life is intentionally terminated she has been killed, whereas if she is no longer being aggressively treated her life is not ended by the withdrawal of such aggressive treatment but by the underlying disease.One way to show that it is in most cases implausible to think that the

  2. Suicide: Selfish or Selfless?

    Other loved ones wonder how they could have missed the "suicidal signs". They remember every argument, every negative comment they made, and feel almost certain that they alone are to blame for this person's death. In fact, the most selfish aspect of suicide is leaving loved ones with so much guilt that they may never recover.

  1. 'Self-Preservation and Moral Duty'

    This is not to say that Bauman's conclusions are inevitably concomitant with the truth, if absolute truth exists at all, and there are some general areas of contention to be found with the book as a whole which will be briefly outlined, as well as in the chapter on 'self-preservation

  2. Discuss Mills concept of utilitarianism as a moral theory.

    'The happiness which forms the utilitarian standard of what is right in conduct, is not the agent's own happiness but of that of all concerned. As between his own happiness and that of theirs, utilitarianism requires him to be strictly impartial as a disinterested and benevolent spectator.'

  1. The term moral panic is a popular expression yet it has been widely misused.

    This case was related to the violent film "Child's Play 3", which the offenders had previously watched.16 It is clear that this deviant act committed by fellow children dominated newspaper headlines and created a panic and outrage. The murder was portrayed by the media as a horrific act, which symbolised

  2. Ethnography - A Christian Youth Group

    Next, the candidate does a "talk"-some read it, some don't-it involves "sharing" a personal experience relating to the "theme" of the day. In "sharing" teens may reveal to the group deep personal details which they feel they need to "get off their chest".

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