Comparing Kant's Categorical Imperative And Duties

1985 Words8 Pages
Categorical Imperative and Duties
Kant divides duties into two groups- duties towards others and duties towards self. They are further subdivided into strict and meritorious duties. Lets consider these duties one by one in light of Categorical Imperative.
Strict Duties to others : Consider a person is in need of money. He has no other option left except to borrow it from someone else. He ultimately borrows the money and promises to pay it back. Now, the question arises, should he keep his promise? Here the maxim is- when I am in difficulty, I will make a false promise. Is this right? According to Categorical Imperative, what would it be like if everyone started making false promises and it became a universal law? It would be a undesirable situation where the very notion of ‘promise’ would collapse. Therefore, it is a duty of every rational being not to make a lying promise. Such duties are called strict duties to others.
Strict Duties to self : A man is in a very miserable condition. He is sick of his life and does not want to live more. Can he take away his own life to get relieved? Here the maxim is- do you have a duty to keep your life going on even if it has become miserable? According
…show more content…
Consequentialists differ from Deontologists on their insistence that when it comes to rightness or wrongness, the results of our actions are only things that matter. There are certain features of standard consequentialism: 1. While referring to the results or consequences of an action, consequentialists take into account the overall outcome which also includes the value of action itself. However, they are usually more interested in the consequences not only of people acting in a certain way but also of one 's refrainment from the action. 2. Standard consequentialism assumes that an action is right if and only if the agent could not have done better than
Open Document