Deontology categorical imperative

docx

School

Northern Virginia Community College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

250

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

5

Uploaded by Dominickamara

Report
Deontology and the categorical imperatives Deontological decisions are termed as theories meant to define what actions are bad or good based on a certain set of rules. In other words, deontological ethics put emphasis on the relationship between morality and duty of human actions. These ethics are applied in our daily lives every now and then. ("Ethics Explainer: What is Deontology? - The Ethics Centre", 2016) . Deontological decisions are made based on the normative ethical theory that asserts morality of an act should be determined by whether the act is right or wrong considering a series of rules rather than the consequences of the act. Therefore, deontological decisions are categorized as rule-based ethics, obligations, and duties as well. More so, there might be several forms of deontological ethics, and their moral obligations arise from different set of rules that may include cultural values or religious laws. Deontological decisions are based on duty and they focus on what people do. They function in our daily lives by encouraging everyone to do what is right because it is right and avoid what is wrong because it is wrong. An example of deontological obligation with respect to human life is that it is wrong to kill someone even if it is in form of self-defense. However, a death penalty is an obligation based on the law even if it is wrong. Therefore, it is evident that moral obligations are set based on rules which might be based on the law or cultural values. Categorical imperatives demand with a universal and necessary character prescribes an action as unconditionally good; it commands something for the goodness of the action itself, regardless of what it can achieve. It declares the objectively necessary action itself, without reference to any
extrinsic purpose. For Kant only this type of imperative is properly an imperative of morality. He believed that it is our moral obligations and its derived from pure reasoning. He also argued that it is morally binding on all of us ("Kant & Categorical Imperatives: Crash Course Philosophy #35", 2016). Categorical imperative is limit us not to reflect our behavior solely to our personal egos. As a replacement for the Christian injunction for universal law- love one’s neighbor, The third formulation of Kant's categorical imperative is “act so as to treat people always as ends in themselves, never as a mere means “(Khan,2016) Categorical imperatives have the general form "you must do X", or, in their prohibitive version, "you must not do X"; "You must be truthful", "You must not steal", are examples of categorical imperatives. In any case, it is necessary to be careful because the mere linguistic expression is not enough to determine if the imperative that has guided our behavior is hypothetical or categorical. Hypothetical imperatives are about prudent rather than morality ("Kant & Categorical Imperatives: Crash Course Philosophy #35", 2016) . For instance, you are afraid of unforeseen contingency, so you save your money for the raining days, is an example of prudency not morality. So, find to out if one or the other is the case, it is necessary to refer to what has moved our will. If I did not beat the red light, My conduct is in accordance with duty (according to the imperative "you must obey the driving rules"), but if I have not beaten the red light out of fear of the police or having a ticket, the imperative I have followed is hypothetical ("you must not beat the red light if you do not want to have problems with the police"); however, if we have not beat the red light because the action beating red light is bad in itself, regardless of whether the police can stop me or not, then our imperative is categorical. Kant considered that we can never be absolutely sure that our behavior was not motivated by an interest or by some fear, and
for this reason he concluded that when we seem to follow a categorical imperative it is always possible that the imperative by which we are governed is hypothetical. Kant argued “the categorical is the voice of our own rational selves.” ("Kant & Categorical Imperatives: Crash Course Philosophy #35", 2016) To dig deep into this concept, l will consider the maxim such as “rape is always a bad action” with such a maxim, we equally desire that it is a universal law. The fact that every woman deserves her dignity and pride and because it constitutes devastation on the victim, such as emotional and psychological harm. Respecting a woman’s right or one’s will not to rape is an attitude and principle that could become universal law. (Khan,2005). Studies found the following “Kant argued that Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. “It will be contradictory against the fundamental principle of human right or human dignity if the act of rape becomes a universal law. Hence, the ideal is to always respect human right in its various manifestations. Convert this action into a habit in such a way that it becomes a universal law from the normative and from the moral. In the universal law perspective, I believe that there should be a legally binding law against rape and that the law of the nation made rape a criminal offence is universally binding. According to ("PHILOSOPHY: Immanuel Kant", 2015) Kant extended his categorical imperative into the political sphere that it is the central duty of the government to ensure liberty. He also added that according to Kant a free will and will under moral laws are one and the same. It shows be established as in the case that freedom that our freedom must be examined and implemented in consideration of others and since we cannot practically evaluate or determine the freedom of others. Every rational being is entitled to freedom. Morality becomes law for us only because we
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
are rational being, we must therefore conclude that freedom is a property of all rational beings. (Kant,2004) The will not to rape something that should go primarily beyond all legal norms. We must respect human right by respecting a woman’s pride because we are convinced it is morally incorrect and because we value that moral principle. It must be a matter of conviction, of virtue, of our conscience as human beings, of valuation of another person’s human right, not as a consequence of a law or an imposed norm. If we respect women’s right in all its manifestations, voluntarily, such action will become natural law, it would be carried out without pressure or imposition of any kind. According to (Khan,2005). Kant’s second formulation states, "Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end." In conclusion, the moral judgement in Kant’s arguments, we can see that he was testing the morality of an action by imagining how it would be if it were generally practiced in harmony with one’s judgement. ("PHILOSOPHY: Immanuel Kant", 2015) References:
Khan, R. (2005). Clinicians' Duty to Care, A Kantian Analysis. Longwoods.com. Retrieved 1 February 2021, from https://www.longwoods.com/content/17389/law-and-governance/clinicians- duty-to-care-a-kantian-analysis. PHILOSOPHY: Immanuel Kant. The school of life. (2015). Retrieved 1 February 2021, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsgAsw4XGvU. Kant & Categorical Imperatives: Crash Course Philosophy #35. (2016). Retrieved 1 February 2021, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bIys6JoEDw&feature=emb_logo. Ethics Explainer: What is Deontology? - The Ethics Centre. THE ETHICS CENTRE. (2016). Retrieved 1 February 2021, from https://ethics.org.au/ethics-explainer-deontology/.