Deontological Morality

IMMANUEL KANT

ARGUMENT 1 VS. HAPPINESS (395)

1) Telic Principle: In an organized being suitably adapted to the purpose of life, no organ can be found for any end unless it is the most fit and best adapted for that end.

2) Eudaimonic Principle: A rational and volitional being’s happiness is the real end of nature.

3) If two is true, then nature would have fashioned men to suitably carry this out.

4) Nature has ill-disposed this creature to carry out its end.5) So, happiness is not the end of a rational being’s nature.

ARGUMENT 2 VS. HAPPINESS (395)

1) Those who cultivate reason for the sake of happiness seem to be the least content.

2) So, “there lies at the root of such judgments, rather, the idea that existence has another and much more worthy purpose, for which, and not for happiness, reason is quite properly intended, and which must, therefore, be regarded as the supreme condition to which the private purpose of men must, for the most part, defer.”

ARGUMENT FOR GOOD WILL (393)

1) Intelligence, wit, judgment, courage, resolution, perseverance, power, riches, honor, and health are good and desirable in many respects, but they can also be bad and harmful.

2) Even complete well-being and contentment (happiness) can often be arrogance or pride without a good will.

3) “Thus a good will seems to constitute the indispensable condition of a being even worthy of happiness.”

HOW WILL IS GOOD (394)

“A good will is good not because of what it effects or accomplishes, nor because of its fitness to attain some proposed end; it is good only through its willing, i.e., it is good in itself.”

GOOD WILL AS TELOS (396)

1) Reason cannot guide the will and satisfy all our needs.

2) Reason is a practical faculty that influences the will.

3) So, “its true function must be to produce a will which is not merely good as a means to some further end, but is good in itself.”

HAPPINESS VS. GOOD WILL (396)

“While such a will may not indeed be the sole and complete good, it must, nevertheless, be the highest good and the condition of all the rest, even of the desire for happiness. In this case there is nothing inconsistent with the wisdom of nature that the cultivation of reason, which is requisite for the first and unconditioned purpose, may in many ways restrict, at least in this life, the attainment of the second purpose, namely, happiness, which is always conditioned.”

KEY DEONTIC PRINCIPLES

1) Deontic Principle (399): An action must be done from duty to have moral worth.

2) Principle of Moral Merit (399): An action done from duty derives its moral merit in the maxim by which the action is determined.“The moral worth depends, therefore, not on the realization of the object of the action, but merely on the principle of volition according to which, without regard to any objects of the faculty of desire, the action has been done.”

3) Principle of Necessity (400): Duty is the necessity of an action done out of respect for moral law.“An object of respect can only be what is connected with my will solely as ground and never as effect—something that does not serve my inclination but, rather, outweighs it, or at least excludes it from consideration when some choice is made—in other words, only the law itself can be an object of respect and hence can be a command.”

PREEMINENT GOOD (401)

“Therefore, the pre-eminent good which is called moral can consist in nothing but the representation of the law in itself, and such a representation can admittedly be found only in a rational being insofar as this representation, and not some expected effect, is the determining ground of the will. This good is already present in the person who acts according to this representation, and such good need not be awaited merely from the effect.”

THEORETICAL VS. PRACTICAL MORALITY (404)1) Theoretical: Ordinary reason departs from laws of experience and perceptions of

senses.

2) Practical (Morality): Ordinary understanding strips off laws of experience from perceptions of senses. This, divest of the subtleties of experience, is accessible to the common person.

HAPPINESS VS. DUTY (405)

1. Reason presents to men needs and inclinations (i.e., happiness) as a counterweight to duty.

2. So, happiness and duty confront each other in a natural dialect that challenges the dictates of will.

METAPHYSICS OF MORALS (405)

“Thus is ordinary human reason forced to go outside its sphere and take a step into the field of practical philosophy, not by any need for speculation … but on practical grounds themselves. There it tries to obtain information and clear instruction regarding the source of its own principle and the correct determination of this principle in its opposition to maxims based on need and inclination, so that reason may escape from the perplexity of opposite claims and may avoid the risk of losing all genuine moral principles through the ambiguity into which it easily falls. Thus when ordinary practical reason cultivates itself, there imperceptibly arises in it a dialectic which compels it to seek help in philosophy. The same thing happens in reason’s theoretical use; in this case, just as in the other, peace will be found only in a thorough critical examination of our reason.”

TWO IMPERATIVES

1. Hypothetical: Phrase in if-then language to express instrumental relationship.

2. Categorical: Deontic, non-hypothetical.

HYPOTHETICAL IMPERATIVES

1. If you want to look wise, be quiet.2. If you want fame, go to the front.3. If you want health, exercise and eat well.

Reason is merely instrumental in helping us attain what we desire through self-interest or sympathy. Hypothetical reasoning for Kant is instrumental and not properly moral. The hypothetical imperative is an imperative, that is conditional on a wish for some desired value, good, or end.

CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVES

1. Preserve one’s life (397).2. Be beneficent where one can (398).3. Secure one’s own happiness (399).4. Never lie (402).5. Never break a promise (402).6. Have sincerity in friendship (408).7. Do not committing suicide (422).8. Develop one’s natural faculties as fully as

possible (423).9. Do not be indifferent when secure to those

who are needy (423).

Reason functions non-instrumentally in enabling us to see that which duty compels us to perform. Categorical reasoning for Kant is moral reasoning.

THE GROUNDING PRINCIPLE1. Grounding Principle I (Universal Formula) (421 & 402): Act

only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.

2. Grounding Principle II (Law-of-Nature Formula) (421): Act as if the maxim of your action were to become through your will a universal law of nature.

3. Grounding Principle III (End-in-Itself Formula) (429): Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end.

4. Grounding Principle IV (Formula of Autonomy) (431-432): The will of every rational being is a will that legislates universal law.

5. Grounding Principle V (Kingdom-of-Ends Formula) (433): The will of every rational being is a will that legislates in a kingdom of ends.

PROBLEMS WITH KANT

Problem of Good Will: We begin with a will that is autonomous and free—i.e., somehow outside of naturally necessitated events. Will does not become good through actions (experience); how then does it become good? Any developmental picture, which he seems to presuppose, brings in experience.

Problem of Autonomy: How does will, which clearly is sometimes impacted by antecedents, stand outside of natural necessity?

Problem of Rationality: Kant assumes a standardized notion of rationality of which all are capable.