Immanuel Kant's Theory Of Duty

In his theory of moral Kant puts aside emotions and disregards human body. According to Kant rationality is the basic need of human being. Kantianism is a part of deontological ethics and is always in contrast of utilitarianism, which emphasizes the consequences. In Kant’s perspective actions are approved or disapproved in and by themselves. Peoples’ rights should never be violated, even if it brings good consequences.

KANT’S ETHICAL THEORY Introduction Immanuel Kant(1724-1804) was German philospher who was the opponent of utilitarianism and supported the Deontological Theory. Kant believed that certain types of actions were absolutely prohibited, even in cases where the action would bring about more happiness than the alternative. For Kantians, there are two questions that we must ask ourselves whenever we decide to act: (i) Can I rationally will that everyone act as I propose to act? If the answer is no, then we must not perform the action. (ii) (ii) Does my action respect the goals of human beings rather than merely using them for my own purposes?

Therefore, it is believed that only actions derived from duty have moral values, and those descended from inclination should not be considered worth morally in any case. This theory differs considerably from Aristotle’s beliefs in Nichomachean Ethics when he argues that taking the right action by inclination is a proof of a moral character. Moreover, duty is necessary to create universal rules. One of these rules states that we should act upon pure intentions because moral rules cannot be excused, hence lying is always wrong. Unfortunately, there is an issue with pure reasoning- every experience is different.

In a simpler matter, you do what you do because of the way you are. To be truly morally responsible for what you do, you must be responsible for the way you are. But, you cannot be truly responsible for the way you are; therefore, you cannot truly be morally responsible for what you do. Strawson follows this explanation of the argument by stating that we are what we are, and no punishment or reward is "fitting" for us. He then goes on to expand on the consequences of the Basic Argument.

The Constitution of the United States of America states that all Americans are entitled to "unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness," To effectively pursue happiness and live life, health is required. However, if not everyone is gaining access to their health because they can’t afford health insurance, then they are losing their constitutional rights. It also states in the Constitution that it is the responsibility of the people and the government to “promote the general welfare” of all Americans. “According to former Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), as part of efforts to "promote the general welfare," health care "is a legitimate function of government. "” (Kucinich).

Kant was an 18th century philosopher who examined the roots of philosophy and formed the deontological moral duty theory. This theory assesses the moral integrity of an action, based on its motive, irrespective of its consequence; hence asserting that an action can only be good if, and only if, its maxim is duty to the moral law. The basic structure of Kant 's construction of the moral law is the categorical imperative, which explains that we have a duty to act in the same way every time we are faced with an ethical decision. You do the right thing simply because it is the right thing to do. According to Kant only the categorical imperative provides an enlightened premise for making decisions without relying on any other order i.e.

Even the answer of Eichmann demonstrates how wrong Kantian ethics had been misused and misinterpreted by him. Nevertheless, according to Kantian ethics, a personal life should not have a confliction with the law which is another reason that indicates that Eichmann was not a true “proper”

903729366 Essay 1: Kant In Kant’s “From Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals”, he elaborates on the significance of the goodwill: that doing something out of good will means doing it strictly for the purpose of duty, because it is your duty as a person to do the right thing. To support this statement, one must agree that the the good will is a morally valuable thing. For example, my interpretation of Kant says, “if there is not a good will to correct the influence of these (gifts of fortune) in the mind, then these fortunes can over-take good will and bad occurrences may happen.” Kant believes that when we perform an action, the morality of our actions do not depend on their outcomes. When we perform actions with a good will in mind, they will result in a morally valuable consequence. To ask if it is morally valuable would be to ask the question if good will assists people in making the better decision — whether deciding

Deontological ethical theory, is frequently identified with Immanuel Kant, as he believed from his theory of duty, that If something is wrong then it is always wrong. "Deontological ethical theory is an ethical theory that evaluates behavior in terms of adherence to duty or obligation, regardless of consequences" (Mitchell, 2015, p.455).Deontology considers that moral actions are equivalent to abiding by the rules.Basically this assists us in understanding which behaviors are acceptable and which are prohibited. "Deontological theory holds that human beings have a certain duty of action, and doing the right ethical thing means doing our human duty in a given situation" (South University, 2016,week 5). The main objective of deontology is to establish balanced rules in addition to acting morally which essentially is ones

The idea of happiness is not a morally worthy pursuit, and only actions which come from respect to moral law, poses moral value. Contrastly to Aristotle, happiness cannot be the moral motivator of human action. For Kant, happiness is simply getting what you want and is not the basis for his system of ethics. It is powerless as a function of the basis of morality. For example, getting what you want may mean preventing others from getting what they want, so it seems impossible for everyone to be happy, and therefore moral.