Content and Exam Tips for OCR A Level Religious Studies
The Categorical Imperative
Kantian Ethics
Content
Kantian ethics, including:
duty
the hypothetical imperative o the categorical imperative and its three formulations
the three postulates
Key Knowledge
origins of the concept of duty (acting morally according to the good regardless of consequences) in deontological and absolutist approaches to ethics
what it is (a command to act to achieve a desired result) and why it is not the imperative of morality
what it is (a command to act that is good in itself regardless of consequences) and why it is the imperative of morality based on:
Formula of the law of nature (whereby a maxim can be established as a universal law)
Formula of the end in itself (whereby people are treated as ends in themselves and not means to an end)
Formula of the kingdom of ends (whereby a society of rationality is established in which people treat each other as ends and not means)
what they are and why in obeying a moral command they are being accepted:
Freedom
Immortality
God
Kantian Deontology
Social, political and cultural influences on Kant’s ethical theory
Kant was a key figure during the ‘Age of Enlightenment’. During this time, Science was on the rise as new discoveries about the universe were being made. It is also known as the ‘Age of Reason’ as many scholars, including Kant, felt human reason was to be held in highest regard and is the pinnacle of creation.
People began to question God’s existence for the first time and many fought to politically remove power from the Church. Kant therefore believed strongly in individuals making free choices, not being blind sheep, but that human reason should guide all of our moral choices.
Personally speaking, Kant was raised by parents who belonged to the Lutheran sect Pietism. Pietism emphasised honesty and moral living over strict following of the Bible, more concerned with feeling than rationality. It is suggested that the values Kant's parents held, of "hard work, honesty, cleanliness, and independence”, set him an example and influenced him more than their Pietism did.
Kant was fascinated by the work of Isaac Newton, therefore showing an interest in rationality, coupled with the Enlightenment movement.
Whilst Kant believed that rationality is essential, it is perhaps from his parents influence, that he believes it should be concerned with morality and good will.
Also the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, whose work The Social Contract, influenced Kant's view on the fundamental worth of human beings.
Natural law (the belief that the moral law is determined in nature by God) and Intuitionism (the belief that humans have intuitive awareness of objective moral truths) were also influential for Kant.
At the age of 46, Kant was an established scholar and an increasingly influential philosopher; however he came to recognize that he had failed to account for a number of important things in his theories so far.
He also credited David Hume with awakening him from "dogmatic slumber."
Kant didn’t publish anything for the next eleven years and instead spent his silent decade, in near isolation, working on a solution to the problems posed.
When Kant emerged from his silence in 1781, the result was the Critique of Pure Reason, now uniformly recognized as one of the greatest works in the history of philosophy, although it is over 800 pages long and written in a dry, scholastic style.
Duty-Based Ethics and the Categorical Imperative
Of all forms of deontology, that of Immanuel Kant continues to feature prominently in any discussion of what constitutes right action. Kant’s moral theory rests on the premise that the reason for performing any given action is that it is morally obligatory to do so. This is only correct motivation for an action and indicates that simply following the correct moral rules is often not sufficient – instead, we must also have the correct motivation.
Kant believed that, since all men possess reason and a conscience, it would be possible for all people to arrive at an understanding of moral truths independent of experience. Morality was a priori, not a posteriori, and, because reason was universal, moral reasoning would lead to the same results over and over again. The acceptance of other guides to morality, such as utilitarian principles, Kant called heteronomy – literally ‘an other law’ – which he claimed was always mistaken.
Kant argued that the universe is essentially just and that the moral law would be satisfied in a post-mortem existence. He claimed that the existence of God is a necessary requirement of a just universe and for the moral law to be balanced. Kant attempted to discover the rational principles that would stand as a categorical imperative, grounding all other ethical judgements. The imperative would have to be categorical rather than hypothetical since truth morality should not depend on individual likes and dislikes or on abilities, opportunities or other external circumstances.
Kant’s distinction between a categorical and hypothetical imperative is vital. He believed that moral commands are not hypothetical imperatives that tell us how to achieve a particular end. A categorical imperative, however, is an end in itself. It expresses our absolute and unconditional duty to act without condition in a certain way and Kant considered it be of supreme importance.
Duty and Imperatives
Kant argues that the only thing that is good at all times is a 'good will'. This means having a good intention; an intention to do our duty. This means acting morally according to good regardless of the consequences.
Our actions might be motivated by lots of things. Kant rules out two false intentions:
We should not base our views of right and wrong on consequences as these are not within our control
We should not base our decisions on what we want to do as our emotions change on a regular basis.
Kant argues that the only thing that does matter is that we do our duty. We should do our duty just because it is our duty not for any reward.
Kant believes it is possible to work out what our duty is by establishing what sort of command (imperative) lies behind it. When we carry out an action, Kant believes we have a rule or maxim (the rule that we are following when we perform an action) in mind. We need to establish whether it is a hypothetical or categorical imperative.
Hypothetical imperatives are 'if...' command. They are commands that are followed to achieve a desired result.
Categorical imperatives are commands that are good in themselves regardless of consequences.
Kant suggests that there are three different tests that can be applied to a maxim in order to see if it is a categorical imperative:
Formula of the law of nature (universal law): here we should ask if it would be logical for this action to be universalised.
Persons as ends: here we should see how our maxim treats people. Kant believes that we should treat people as an end in themselves; as free rational beings who deserve dignity and respect.
Kingdom of ends: Kant asks us to imagine we are part of the law-making group of an imaginary country where everyone always treats others as an end. Kant suggests that a categorical imperative is an imperative that could be permitted in such a place.
Philippa Foot raises some challenges to Kant's view that morality should be based on a series of categorical imperatives. She argues that what is missing from Kant's account is an adequate explanations of our motives and desires. Only hypotheticals give us a reason to act. In Kant's categoricals, we are just told that we must do a certain thing; there is no account of motives.
Perfect and Imperfect Duties
Kant suggests that there are two types of duties.
A perfect duty is one where our maxim cannot be universalised because a logical contradiction would occur if we were to do so.
Imperfect duties are when duties do not create a logical contradiction but they do present us with a situation that no rational person could desire or will.
Kant and Categorical Imperatives
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
Duty as an idea is better than depending on our inclinations. Our inclinations are led by our emotions which change.
Kant's ethics are rational. Kant gives human beings the responsibility for making decisions and he believes that humanity's ability to reason and work things out will enable us to reach the right answers.
Kant is right that consequences can't be predicted.
Kant's principle of universal law is a useful rule.
Kant's ethics values persons.
Kant's ethics can be seen as secular.
Weaknesses
There is inflexibility to any decision as it is an absolutist ethical system.
The outcome of the situation is ignored.
Kant gives no clear guidance on what to do when duties clash.
Kant's ethics is a good theoretical solution to many moral issues; his kingdom of ends shows his aim to make moral rules for an ideal world. Ethics is about how the world should be. This ignores reality.
The principle of universal law does not necessarily show us our moral duties.
Wider Reading
Prima Facie Duties
W. D. Ross argued that the notion of acting out of motivation is incoherent as we cannot choose why we act, we can only choose how we act.
Nevertheless, Ross did not believe that the consequences of an action are the only way to judge the morality of that action. Other things matter too – so many things that it is impossible to definitively enumerate them. However, among the things which matter are beneficence (helping others), self-improvements (developing our talents), and treating people justly.
What we actually do will be affected by various things which have previously occurred. Ross calls these prima facie duties – duties to repay acts of generosity or to help those who are dependent upon us. However, we cannot tell in advance what our prima facie duties will be. These duties are not ranked in order of importance. A conflict between two of these duties does not negate both or one of them but rather is a conflict between two things which do matter and which is resolved by making a decision about which matters more in a particular situation. According to Ross, the only way we can come to any moral knowledge is through moral experience, since we only learn from experience when certain moral duties matter and when they are less important.
Although Ross may be thought to offer something of a middle way between consequentialism and absolutist deontology, his approach may be criticised for its lack of attention to the issue of rights. If we cannot tell in advance which duties are important, then all duties are open to subjective evaluation and it is impossible to claim that in some cases rights decide the issue or the right to fair trial. However, the notion of prima facie duties injects some flexibility into Kant’s theory. Duties which may have been valid in the 18th century are not necessarily valid today, whilst others have taken their place.
Further Strengths of Kantian Ethics
A contemporary philosopher who supports deontological ethics is Thomas Nagel. He has been much influenced by Kant and has sought to show that deontology is still of relevance today. His main work on ethics is The Possibility of Altruism. He writes
“Common moral intuition recognizes several types of deontological reasons – limits on what one may do to people or how one may treat them. There are special obligations created by promises and agreements; the restrictions against lying and betrayal; the prohibitions against violating various individual rights, rights not to be killed, injured, imprisoned, threatened, tortured, coerced, robbed; the restrictions against imposing certain sacrifices on someone simply as a means to an end; and perhaps the special claim of immediacy, which makes distress at a distance so different from distress in the same room. There may also be a deontological requirement of fairness, of even-handedness or equality in one’s treatment of people.”
In other words, in daily life we generally assume that there are some fixed duties and expect others to comply with them. We expect fairness, loyalty, etc.
Motivation is valued over consequences, which are beyond our control. An immoral motive cannot be justified by unforeseen good consequences, but a good motive is, in itself, worthy of value.
It is a humanitarian principle in which are men are considered to be of equal value and worthy of protection.
Justice is always an absolute, even if the majority of people do not benefit.
It recognises the value of moral absolutes that do not change with time or culture. There must surely be some things which are beyond fad or fashion.
It provides objective guidelines for making moral decisions, without the need for lengthy calculation or possible outcomes.
Further Weaknesses of Kantian Ethics
Moral obligations appear arbitrary or inexplicable except by reference to duty. In reality, our decision-making is influenced by many more factors, and it is questionable whether duty is as good a motive as Kant suggested.
How far can a good will or motive mitigate a disastrous outcomes?
Kant argues that which is good to do is what we ought to do and that what is inherently good and intrinsically right is the way in which we ought to behave for the mutual good of all, irrespective of consequences. In this respect, critics of Kant have accused him of committing the Naturalistic Fallacy – of turning an ‘is’ into an ‘ought’.