• 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. 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

  1. To what extent does the political theory of John Rawls allow scope for moral ...

    Furthermore, in Political Liberalism he asserts that his theory is compatible with a morally diverse society owing to the idea of an overlapping consensus. He claims that an actual morally diverse society would be able to reach an agreement on the principles of justice by ignoring their individual moral values to prevent self-interested, biased negotiations.

  2. I would like to begin my evaluation of moral relativism by further exploring the ...

    Unlike relativism, absolutism states that certain morals should be considered intolerable, and hence be reprimanded. Hospers points out the issue of slavery to critically analyze the relativist position, and their perceivable predicament. He states that relativists "may believe in some one overall standard of right, such as the maximum happiness of the people concerned...

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

    Mill believes that if people are appropriately educated, socialised and developed they are more likely to promote good in the world and lead satisfying lives. Again there are echoes of Aristotle in his writings. It is important to highlight that the explanation Mill provides as to why we should endeavour to experience higher pleasures is unsatisfactory.

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

    Moral panics feed off on guilt as society needs a scapegoat. There is a strong relationship between crime and media as it encourages social concern and the media plays a role in forming people's views. The media may form stereotypes, take bits out of the trade to make money and even publicise bad things which excite the society.

  1. According to secularization theory what should happen to religion as society undergoes modernization?

    this information and final conclusion behind the data in what it is required to prove and who is presenting it. Yes society is evolving and changing as well as people perceptions, while there still is a need for people to seek spiritual and religious truth, many are more inclined to 'believe without belong'.

  2. Write an essay on the moral defensibility of voluntary euthanasia for an autonomous adult.

    There are others who worry about retaining their dignity in the last stages of life. There have been a great number of advances in medical technology in the last century, most of which are aimed at extending life. But extending life does not mean extending quality of life.

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