Immanuel Kant’s The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals is his first crucial attempt to provide moral philosophy, and his work has endures a standout among the most powerful philosophers. Kant’s analysis can be perceived as a foundation for imminent studies by clarifying the major ideas and rules of moral rationale and demonstrating that they are subordinated to rational factors. He seeks to prove that the discovery of the principle of morality is achievable. What is more, he grants a revolutionary assertion the rightness of a choice is controlled by the nature of the principle an individual decides to follow. Therefore, Kant’s moral sense theories often are depicted as strikingly unconventional.
Within Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he considers humanity and its relationship with moral virtue. By the end of this essay, I will have summarized how Aristotle sees virtue as something that can be improved through repetition and what sort of ideology is required for an action to be considered fully virtuous. Also, I will address how one may disagree with Aristotle’s views on how a person learns to become virtuous, in thinking that the concept of virtue must be precisely defined rather than free-formed, as Aristotle understands it to be. Following that counterargument, I shall refute it by explaining how a satisfactory childhood impresses society’s code of conduct upon a youth and how a youth learns how to apply that code of conduct through
The idea of virtue ethics was first introduced to the world by Aristotle over 2,300 years ago in 325 BC (Rachels 173). Virtue ethics operate on the belief that people develop good character by looking at the virtues they admire in other people and emulating them. In order to do this, a person must ask themselves what kind of person they want to be and focus on choosing characteristics not specific people to emulate. Unfortunately, virtue ethics were quickly overshadowed by other perspectives on ethical theory as Christianity gained popularity and values changed. As time went on people stopped asking themselves, “What traits make a good person?” and instead asked, “What is the right thing to do?” (Rachels 174).
Introduction: Kant’s Categorical Imperative and the Emptiness Charge in Kant’s Moral Philosophy Immanuel Kant’s moral philosophy is mostly remembered for its central thesis, the Categorical Imperative (CI). According to Kant, rational beings experience the moral law as a Categorical Imperative. The Categorical Imperative commands universally and unconditionally, from which all duties are derived. Kant articulates the Categorical Imperative through several formulations. The most prominent formulations of the Categorical Imperative are known as the Formula of Universal Law (CI1), the Humanity Formulation (CI2) and the Kingdom of Ends Formulation (CI3).
In Aristotle’s approach, he included a list of virtues which can be applied to many situations we find ourselves in on an everyday basis. This includes virtues such as fairness, self-discipline, loyalty and moderation. I will be elaborating on each of the virtues mentioned in the later part of this. As mentioned earlier, according to Aristotle, a virtue is the mean by reference to two vices where one of excess and the other of deficiency. First, I would like to explain on the virtue of fairness.
As we saw above, Korsgaard's argument for the categorical imperative starts from our capacity of reflectivity. Allan Wood, Brian Leuck and Sergio Tenenbaum, interpret her as argueing that from here, the individual agent /constructs/ morality through an individual act. And furthermore, they believe that this perspective does not contain any restrictions upon what law he chooses to legislate. The problem they point to is different from the Prichardian challenge, but it is based in the same interpretation of the self as a source of normativity. Wood writes that in Korsgaard's argument the objective worth of humanity and of the moral law are created by human beings and are constituted by "an act or attitude of ours".
These are things that can be learned through study. Virtues of character are virtues that must be learned through habit. These virtues will be learned through habituation and will at some point be like second nature. Speaking of nature, Aristotle doesn’t think that virtues are a natural part of the human condition. Both these virtues have to be learned.
The divine command theory, utilitarianism, Kant’s duty defined morality, natural law theory, and Aristotle’s virtue ethics are the five types of ethical theories. The divine command theory states that what is morally right and wrong will be decided by God. Utilitarianism states that “Action “A” is morally right if and only if it produces the greatest amount of overall happiness. Kant’s duty defined morality states that what is important is acting for the sake of producing good consequences, no matter what the act is. Natural law theory states that people should focus on the good and avoid any evil.
Different from consequentialism, people who tend to have the mind set of a deontologist believe that you should do your ethical duty, regardless of the outcome. Immanuel Kant designed ‘The Categorical Imperative’ theory which was associated with the fact that it was commanding us to practice our morals and desires in a specific way which was exercised through two rules. Kamm (2000) claims that these components were to ‘(1) treat persons as ends in themselves and (2) do not treat them as mere means’. Kamm is basically suggesting that we seek happiness of others, as that is morally right, however fulfill capacities of one’s own intellect. From following both of these we arrive at an imperative and it is categorical.