According to Kant, nothing is wholly good because they can always be attached to some bad or be misused for bad. Be it mental talents, character or gifts of good fortune they, in themselves, are not good. The only thing that can be called good is good will. Good will is not good because of what it achieves, although it can produce results of good. good will is good by virtue of its existence, the sole purpose to produce good. Whether it produces that good or not, it in itself is good.
Kant says that happiness is not a product of reason but rather reason actually reduces peoples happiness. Reason instead must help people to produce good will. Kant says that this will, produced through reason, "must be the supreme good and the condition of every other", including the desire of happiness.
To better explain good will, Kant takes the "notion of duty" into his explanation. A good will is a will that acts for duty and actions are only moral if they are drivin by duty, good will in turn. Acting when duty is the only reason to act is morally right. Duty does not have to be pleasant, just morally right. Just because a behavior is praiseworthy does not mean that it is a moral action. We have many inclinations that drive us to do praiseworthy actions, those good actions aren't moral unless they are driven by duty alone.
Again, Kant reinforces that moral worth, like good will, is not judged by the product of actions but rather by the principles that guided the actions - duty. He defines duty as "the necessity of acting from respect for the law." Inclinations, at best, may be approved, but Kant does not believe that they can be respected. Actions done by duty exclude inclinations, leaving only the law which has pure respect. Morals must lie in the "conception of the law, which is only possible in a reasonable being."
Kant believes that the supreme principle or law of morality is the "categorical imperative." Imperatives are things that people ought to do, which shows the connection of reason to a will. Hypothetically imperatives are ones that have a practical necessity of a possible action as a means to something that is willed. Categorical imperatives are where the actions are necessary in themselves - not for another mean to an end. Categorical are good in themselves (if will and reason are connected) while Hypothetical are means to other ends.
Kant believes that there is only one categorical imperative that we should follow: Act only on a maxim that you can will to be a universal law. These maxims for moral action must have no contradictions and should maintain the purity of its purpose/will.
Kant's ideas of categorical imperative have social implications. We must treat people as a end in themselves not a means to an end outside of the relationship that you have. "Things" are means to an end while "persons" are means to themselves.
When the principle is complete, it must follow two rules: First, people should be respected as ends in themselves and second, any moral maxim followed must be universally followable.
Discussion Questions/Comments
Can a person's "good will" be caused by an inclination? Isn't good will an inclination in itself?
I really liked Kant's definition of happiness! It mades a lot of sense to me.
I have become confused (starting in #9) if Kant means good will every time he says will. Is all will produced by reason good will, since reason was used to create it?
With the one categorical imperative that we should follow, does Kant mean that we should only act on moral maxims that are reasoned with good will and should be law?
Key Terms/Definitions
Inclination: a person's tendency or urge to act or feel in a particular way; a disposition or propensity
Happiness: contentment with one's condition
Maxim: a short, pithy statement expressing a general truth or rule of conduct (ex: actions speak louder than words)
Link to Reading: https://ereserve.plu.edu/protected/phil/b125_kant.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment